The Environmental Protection Agency wasn't all bad, at first, nor was it entirely unnecessary, since
there were still hundreds of large and small companies in the U.S. which did inconsiderate things to
save money, like pouring nasty chemicals into the atmosphere and the rivers. And there are a
lot of great people who work for the EPA who really want to make the country a better place to
live. But still… like any government agency, the EPA will never go away even if most of its
goals have been accomplished. This is partly because no politician would dare to propose eliminating
it, and partly because bureaucracies take root and, with the help of the news media, they constantly find
new reasons to exist.

Suppose the Congress developed a backbone and abolished the EPA tomorrow morning. Would the air and
water be in any danger? Not really, because there are environmental protection agencies
in all fifty states and every U.S. territory.
Overlap and duplication of effort is always costly. Think of the money we'd save.

The EPA thrives on fear, just like Satan himself. The EPA wants you to be afraid of ozone, coal, hydraulic
fracturing of shale, dust in the air, and a dozen other things that you will probably never even notice. The EPA
is constantly sounding the alarm about problems we don't really have.

The EPA's latest quest for power is a shocking bypass of the Congress: The EPA has unilaterally
decided that carbon dioxide is a pollutant, which is absurd; moreover, the EPA has decreed that
carbon dioxide (which we all exhale) is harmful to humans, because of the belief that CO2 causes "global
warming." These foundations are all crumbling rapidly, as discussed on other pages.

Note: New material is added to the bottom of the main subsection below, so everything you see here is in chronological order, roughly.
The newest information is near the bottom of the page, in other words.

Overview:The
EPA: The Worst Of Many Rogue Federal Agencies. In the Age of Obama, there are many viable candidates for the
official title of Washington's "Private Sector Enemy Number One." You could make a strong case for the National Labor
Relations Board, the Department of Homeland Security, the Transportation Security Administration, and others, but my choice
would be the Environmental Protection Agency. For over 20 years, I have gathered stories about ways in which the
EPA has perpetrated misfeasance and malfeasance, misdeed, and mischief.

Another overview:Replacing
the Environmental Protection Agency. Beginning around 1981, liberal activist groups
recognized EPA could be used to advance their political agenda by regulating virtually all human
activities regardless of their impact on the environment. Politicians recognized they could win
votes by posing as protectors of the public health and wildlife. Industries saw a way to use
regulations to handicap competitors or help themselves to public subsidies. Since that time, not a
single environmental law or regulation has been passed that benefitted either the environment or society.

How to replace
the EPA. Of all the regulatory deadweight on the economy, the Environmental Protection
Agency is almost certainly the heaviest of the federal government's intrusions. If voters should
hand control of the White House and Congress to the GOP in 2016, structural reform ought to be the
heart of the program to rescue America from the disasters Obama and the Democrats have wrought.
Part of that structural reform should be replacement of the EPA with a more effective and economical
institutional arrangement. The Heartland Institute has put forth a plan to do exactly that.

The EPA's original work is finished.Tier 3
Tyranny. [Scroll down] The latest example involves a third layer (or tier) of rules the agency says will clean the
nation's air and save lives by forcing refineries to remove more sulfur and other impurities from gasoline. EPA and refiners call the
proposal Tier 3 rulemaking. Tier 3 tyranny is more accurate, as the rules would cost billions of dollars while bringing
infinitesimal benefits, and will likely be imposed regardless. Since 1970, automakers have eliminated some 99 percent of
pollutants that once came out of the tailpipes of the nation's cars. "Today's cars are essentially zero-emission vehicles, compared
to 1970 models," says air pollution expert Joel Schwartz, coauthor of the book Air Quality in America.

The EPA's current work is futile.The Obama EPA's War on America. Greenhouse gas emissions are primarily carbon dioxide
(CO2), a gas vital to all life on Earth, the "food" that vegetation depends upon. It plays no role whatever in a "global warming" that is not occurring.
It is emitted by the Earth's many active volcanoes and hot springs. It is exhaled by humans and land animals. It is the product of the combustion of
hydrocarbons. As it increased in the atmosphere, the Earth has entered a cooling — not a warming — spell since the late 1990s.
Its atmospheric concentration is a very tiny 0.039 percent by volume. It is, however, the justification on which much of the EPA's enforcement
activities are based.

Never Cleaner. By any demonstrable measure, the
environment in the U.S. has never been cleaner in our lifetimes than now. [...] As a measure of the quality of air in our country, the EPA maintains data
and statistics that quantify air quality from 1980 to the present. Based on the EPA's own data, the national ambient air quality standards for certain
target pollutants have all steadily and dramatically reduced. As a national average:
• Carbon monoxide has been reduced 82%
• Ozone has been reduced 28%
• Lead has been reduced 89%
• Nitrogen oxides have been reduced 52%
• Particulate matter as PM10 has been reduced 38%, and fine particulate matter as PM2.5 has been reduced 27%
• Sulfur dioxide has been reduced 83%

The EPA can no longer justify its existence.EPA: Hiding One's Light Under a Bushel.
In 1970 [when the EPA was created,] 31 million tons of sulphur dioxide, a prime contributor to smog, was emitted into the atmosphere.
In 2008 it was 11 million tons. In 1970 34 million tons of volatile organic compounds were emitted. In 2008 it was
16 million. In 1970 204 million tons of carbon monoxide; in 2008 it was 72 million. The EPA recently declared
carbon dioxide a pollutant (which means we pollute the atmosphere every time we exhale). And the only major country in the world where
carbon dioxide emissions are declining? The United States. We emitted less CO2 in 2012 than in 1992. Water pollution has
similarly abated. Unhealthy air days in major U.S. cities these days are a rarity. Even Los Angeles had only 18 in all
of 2011. Manhattan had exactly none.

The cleaner the enviroment, the more desperate enviros become to tackle the Next Big Scare.Obsessive-Compulsive Environmentalism.
[Scroll down] The fact remains that because American industry is greatly improving its environmental practices and is proactively
addressing all the "big problems," there's only one way for the EPA to stay relevant: find little "problems" — even tiny,
infinitesimal ones — and inflate them into issues of tremendous importance. Combine the poorly understood concept of
risk, a technically ignorant mainstream media, and a public that has been conditioned to equate the word "chemical" with "deadly poison"
and you have the ideal conditions to do just that.

Washington
Wants To Regulate ... Everything. Both the EPA, which has launched the Obama
administration's war on coal, and the Army Corps of Engineers want to expand the definition of
waters that would be under their regulatory boot. It looks like a scheme that will give them
dominion over anything that's already wet — and anything that might become so. We don't
exaggerate the plan's potential intrusiveness. "The EPA is proposing that puddles, ponds,
ditches, ephemerals and isolated wetlands fall under the Clean Water Act and expand the regulatory
authority to the EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers," the Journal Gazette & Times Courier,
which serves an agricultural community in Illinois, reported last week.

EPA Continues Imposing Costly
and Unnecessary New Restrictions. President Obama's Environmental Protection Agency has already promulgated a tsunami of 1,920 regulations, many of
which will bring few health or environmental benefits but will impose high economic and unemployment costs, often to advance the administration's decidedly
anti-hydrocarbon agenda. The Heritage Foundation calculates EPA's 20 "major" rulemaking decisions alone could cost the United States more than
$36 billion per year.

EPA regulations violate constitutional rights.
Since its creation in 1970, the Environmental Protection Agency has done more harm than good. EPA regulations cost more than 5 percent of our annual gross
domestic product — the equivalent of the costs of defense and homeland security combined. Since EPA regulations have expanded, unemployment in
America has increased by 33 percent. This abuse of power by the implementation of regulations infringes upon our basic constitutional rights.

Age of environmental fear.
The United States is among the cleanest nations on the planet. U.S. environmental programs have set the
standard for the world. Many other nations copy our regulations wholesale. We have set tough goals and
achieved them. Lead, nitrogen dioxide, ozone and carbon monoxide levels have declined precipitously.
Likewise, levels of benzene, arsenic, mercury and many other pollutants have decreased. Perhaps most important,
the life expectancy of the average American has risen from 71 to about 77 years. But don't expect the
government or environmentalists to talk about this success.

How the EPA's
Green Tyranny is Stifling America. The relationship between environmental regulation and economic
growth has gone from dysfunctional to disastrous under the leadership of Barack Obama's EPA Administrator Lisa
Jackson. Jackson's EPA has assumed broad new powers and promulgated sweeping new regulations unlike anything
America has seen since the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act were signed into law 40 years ago. While
much of the public has focused on the EPA's plans to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions, the agency's power grab
extends into far more areas of society and the economy than fossil-fuel use alone.

Runaway Trains of Bureaucracy.
Government programs succeed through failure. A program that actually "solved" whatever
problem prompted its creation would be wiped out. A bureaucrat who runs a tight ship, and brings his
operation in under budget, will be "rewarded" with a smaller budget. Every single organ of our federal
government is working tirelessly to solve a problem that is much worse than originally anticipated,
and therefore requires increased funding. When was the last time you heard of a big federal program
that was shut down ahead of schedule and under budget, because it completed its mission?

The "Say Anything" Power Grab.
As Utah Sen. Robert Bennett said, "It was very clear there were not the votes in the Senate to do a cap-and-trade
bill and that the whole process was going to die. Then we got the oil spill, and all of a sudden,
somehow there is some connection between the EPA and the oil spill."

Hold Your Breath.
This week the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) decided that the air we exhale, carbon dioxide, is toxic
and poses a danger to our well-being. The EPA plans to use this "endangerment" finding to issue costly
new emissions regulations on Americans — once again putting Washington in charge. This deeply
undemocratic process is an arrogant attempt by the Obama Administration to enact by regulation what they
could not pass through the people's Congress.

Obama's
carbon commissars. An Obama staffer — speaking anonymously, of course — told
Fox News: "If [Congress doesn't] pass [emissions-control] legislation ... the EPA is going to have to
regulate in this area. And it is not going to be able to regulate in a market-based way, so it's going
to have to regulate in a command-and-control way." Take that, democracy!

Capitalism and
Climate Change. The goals of the climate-change crowd are not reduction in global warming but
the enactment of a worldwide system of regulation that puts business under government control and transfers
wealth from rich nations to poor ones under the guise of fighting climate change. Should the emissions
come down on their own, as they are doing, the excuse for draconian legislation goes, well, up in smoke.

EPA Must Be Stopped.
The EPA's finding that carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant explains why the administration wasn't too
concerned over possible failure at Copenhagen. This was their Plan B. The finding is an
environmental Sword of Damocles held over the head of the U.S. with a warning that if cap-and-trade legislation
such as Waxman-Markey or Kerry-Boxer is not signed into law, the full regulatory fury of an unelected
bureaucracy will be unleashed on the American people and the U.S. economy.

Czar
Obama takes aim at Congress. There are so many deep flaws in the "Endangerment Ruling" announced
Monday [12/7/2009] by President Obama's Environmental Protection Agency that it is quite possible the worst
of them will escape notice. ... [That is,] the terrible damage this ruling will inflict upon one of the most
basic of American constitutional pillars, the separation of powers among co-equal branches, in this case the
president and Congress. Obama has launched a thermonuclear warhead aimed directly at the very heart
of congressional authority.

Global Warming on Trial.
In the past few years, there have been many court cases concerning the actions of governments to the alleged threat
of global warming. The latest has been filed by Texas against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with
respect to the Endangerment Finding of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). Texas has filed two petitions in federal
court. The first is a request for review of the endangerment finding, which is intended to examine the
science behind global warming.

Climategate
Will Now Hit the EPA. The EPA — perhaps at the urging of others in the Obama
administration — has proposed to regulate GHG emissions on the basis of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports ... and reports primarily based on the IPCC reports. This is
highly unusual for the EPA. I cannot think of any instance where the EPA depended so heavily on
non-EPA synthesis reports to justify proposed regulatory action in their almost 39 years of
existence. As a result of this EPA decision, the EPA's fortunes in regard to regulating
GHGs are directly tied to the fate of the IPCC reports.

Competitive
Enterprise Institute Petitions EPA to Suspend Proposed CO2 Regs. In light of the Climategate
fraud scandal, the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) on Wednesday [12/2/2009] filed a petition asking
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to suspend its plans to regulate greenhouse gas emissions using the
Clean Air Act, pending a thorough investigation of and public comment on the newly released information.

EPA: Greenhouse gases are harmful
to humans. The Environmental Protection Agency took a major step Monday [12/7/2009] toward regulating
greenhouses gases, concluding that climate changing pollution threatens the public health and the environment.

December 7, 2009; Another Day of Infamy?
Bureaucracies are littered with and often controlled by Environmental Studies graduates with little or no science
training. They provide the data politicians use and they dominate the IPCC, especially the Summary for
Policymakers. Lisa Jackson, EPA Administrator referred to controlling pollution in her public statement
introducing the policy. CO2 is not a pollutant and for the Administrator to call it such is a measure of
ignorance of the science. As a chemical engineer Jackson should be no better than most. But this is
not about science it is about control, especially of industry.

Dismissing Climategate,
EPA Moves Forward on CO2 Regulation. To surprisingly tepid applause, EPA head Lisa Jackson just announced
that she has signed "two distinct findings regarding greenhouse gases under section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act."
One was of course the anticipated Endangerment Finding, which states that current and projected concentrations of
six so-called greenhouse gases (GHG) in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future
generations.

The EPA's Carbon
Bomb Fizzles. [Scroll down slowly] But the EPA's legal vulnerabilities go beyond that.
The agency derives its authority to regulate pollutants from the Clean Air Act. To use that law to
regulate greenhouse gases, the EPA has to prove those gases are harmful to human health (thus, the
endangerment finding). Put another way, it must provide "science" showing that a slightly warmer
earth will cause Americans injury or death. Given that most climate scientists admit that a warmer earth
could provide "net benefits" to the West, this is a tall order.

Business Fumes Over Carbon Dioxide Rule.
Officials gather in Copenhagen this week for an international climate summit, but business leaders are focusing even
more on Washington, where the Obama administration is expected as early as Monday [12/7/2009] to formally declare
carbon dioxide a dangerous pollutant. An "endangerment" finding by the Environmental Protection Agency could
pave the way for the government to require businesses that emit carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases to
make costly changes in machinery to reduce emissions — even if Congress doesn't pass pending
climate-change legislation.

EPA Ruling Paves Way For Regulation
of Carbon. The Environmental Protection Agency is expected to announce today [12/7/2009] an "endangerment"
finding on carbon and other greenhouse gasses, which would allow the Obama administration to impose restrictions on
carbon emissions even if "cap and trade" cannot get passed through Congress.

EPA Finding Gives It
Effective Control of the Economy. Under the Clean Air Act, an "endangerment" finding means that the EPA
will have to grant a waiver to those states (such as California) that want to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions from
automobiles. The EPA has already agreed to do so. When "pollutants" that "endanger" human health and welfare
are regulated, the EPA must expand its regulatory program to include "stationary" sources. The EPA has already
announced that it will do so. This is where Obama wants to get off the "endangerment" train, with the
ability to regulate stationary and mobile sources (i.e., industry and cars) with almost complete discretion.

Greenhouse Gases Imperil Health,
E.P.A. Announces. The Environmental Protection Agency on Monday issued a final ruling that
greenhouse gases posed a danger to human health and the environment, paving the way for regulation of carbon
dioxide emissions from vehicles, power plants, factories, refineries and other major sources.

EPA Scientist Silenced in Coverup.
Monday's [12/7/2009] declaration by the Environmental Protection Administration that carbon dioxide and other
greenhouse gases endanger public health is apparently a regulatory fraud. It was made after EPA regulators
refused to consider a report from a leading EPA scientist rejecting the theory that emission of greenhouse
gases causes global warming.

Administration
Warns of 'Command-and-Control' Regulation Over Emissions. The Obama administration is warning
Congress that if it doesn't move to regulate greenhouse gases, the Environmental Protection Agency will take
a "command-and-control" role over the process in a way that could hurt business. The warning, from a top
White House economic official who spoke Tuesday [12/8/2009] on condition of anonymity, came on the eve of EPA
Administrator Lisa Jackson's address to the international conference on climate change in Copenhagen, Denmark.

Congress, not EPA,
should decide on U.S. climate rules. It is good to see Ohio Sen. George Voinovich fighting
hard against the Obama administration's move to impose crippling environmental regulations on American
society, while bypassing Congress. On Monday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency declared
it has scientific evidence that greenhouse gases "threatened the public health and welfare of the American
people." It said the pollutants — mainly carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels —
should be reduced, if not by Congress then by the EPA.

Environmental Blackmail. The
endangerment finding was designed to strike fear into the hearts of those worried about the economic harm of
severe government action. The aim is to terrify industry and move public opinion to such a degree that
Congress feels compelled to pass cap-and-trade legislation — no matter how economically harmful it
would be — in order to pre-empt a much worse, EPA-imposed regulatory regime. It is,
essentially, environmental blackmail.

EPA
Poised to Declare CO2 a Public Danger. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will
early next week, possibly as soon as Monday, officially declare carbon dioxide a public danger, a
trigger that could mean regulation for emitters across the economy, according to several people
close to the matter. Such an "endangerment" decision is necessary for the EPA to move ahead
early next year with new emission standards for cars.

Energy
Czar Raises Possibility Of EPA Implementing Cap-And-Trade. There's more than one way to get cap-and-trade,
President Obama's energy czar said today [10/2/2009]. Carol Browner, the former Environmental Protection
Administration (EPA) administrator who now serves in the Obama administration's newly created role of energy czar,
floated the possibility today of the EPA implementing cap-and-trade energy policies, during an interview at The
Atlantic's First Draft of History symposium in Washington, DC.

Environmental Swine. So
the problem is complex. But the solution begins with a call for the White House to take the lead on reversing federally
mandated use of corn to produce ethanol fuel. Imagine how many jobs we could save if we turned away from ethanol
mandates and towards drilling in ANWR.

The EPA Silences a Climate Skeptic.
[Scroll down] One of President Barack Obama's first acts was a memo to agencies demanding new transparency in
government, and science. The nominee to head the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Lisa Jackson, joined in,
exclaiming, "As administrator, I will ensure EPA's efforts to address the environmental crises of today are rooted
in three fundamental values: science-based policies and program, adherence to the rule of law, and overwhelming
transparency." In case anyone missed the point, Mr. Obama took another shot at his predecessors in April, vowing
that "the days of science taking a backseat to ideology are over." Except, that is, when it comes to Mr. [Alan]
Carlin, a senior analyst in the EPA's National Center for Environmental Economics and a 35-year veteran of the agency.

The Dog Ate
Global Warming. [Scroll down slowly] So the question remains: What was destroyed or
lost, when was it destroyed or lost, and why? All of this is much more than an academic spat. It
now appears likely that the U.S. Senate will drop cap-and-trade climate legislation from its docket this
fall — whereupon the Obama Environmental Protection Agency is going to step in and issue
regulations on carbon-dioxide emissions. Unlike a law, which can't be challenged on a scientific
basis, a regulation can. If there are no data, there's no science.

Climate Of Control. Though the
EPA says a cap-and-trade bill will do nothing if the developing world doesn't cut CO2 emissions, Democrats are intent on
passing a global warming law anyway. What is their real goal?

Greens: No escape from Clean Air Act on
CO2. One reason many industries have been willing to go along with cap-and-trade is to escape tortuous
and unpredictable EPA regulation of CO2 under the CAA. In addition to the many onerous provisions of the CAA, the
law has aggressive "citizen suit" provisions that enable the greens to enforce the law by legal action.

Obama's EPA
Ignores Inconvenient Truths. John Hinderaker of Poweline has alerted everyone to the release of the
suppressed EPA Carlin/Davidson report along with incriminating emails by the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
President Obama and his administration have again been appropriately exposed. Obama's intent can no longer be in
question, and his deceptive activities are instructive as to the role the United Nations will play in his plan to
address the use of American wealth.

Suppressed
EPA scientist breaks silence, speaks on Fox News. Alan Carlin, the senior EPA research analyst
who authored a study critical of global warming that was suppressed by agency officials, has broken his
silence and spoken on Fox News about his situation. Carlin told "Fox & Friends" Steve Ducy and Gretchen
Carlson that his most important conclusion in the study was that the U.S. should not rely upon recommendations
of the UN in making policy decisions regarding global warming.

Faith-Based Science, Indeed.
Dr. Carlin's paper is substantial and deserves to be read in its entirety. But his takeaway is clear:
the best explanations for global temperature fluctuations are changes in the amount of energy emitted by the sun,
and, especially, oscillations in the temperatures of the oceans. The explanatory power of CO2 levels is much
weaker, and, over the past decade, almost non-existent. So why, when the House has just passed a "global
warming" bill, is this report only available via a leak from CEI?

EPA looks
at effects of waste plants on minorities, poor. The Environmental Protection Agency is focusing on the effect
of hazardous waste recycling plants on minorities and low-income communities. The move hearkens back to a Clinton-era
executive order that required federal agencies to consider the effect of their policies on disadvantaged communities.

The Editor says...
Does the EPA exist to protect the environment, or to protect downtrodden minorities? Is it a
scientific agency or just another political tool?

The regulation of
essential elements of life. The EPA is now considering designating CO2 a dangerous pollutant.
The regulation of essential elements of life by our government scares me. It should scare us all.
I am devastated by the notion that our own government founded on freedom would regulate and control the most
fundamental aspects of life on earth. ... We generally have too much water where we don't need it and too
little where we do. Are you planning to regulate water also? ... Carbon dioxide is just as essential
to life as water and oxygen. Carbon dioxide is no more a pollutant than oxygen or water.

When did the lowbrows
take over the culture? The Federal EPA is about to officially declare carbon dioxide to be a
pollutant. That's not just false and unscientific; it's not just an excuse for taxing everything in
sight, including breathing. It's not merely wrong. It's idiotic. It marks a low point
in our national conversation. Scientists or engineers with a grain of sense shouldn't be taking the EPA
seriously for a second. ... Only the truly ignorant could fall for this level of ignorance. Or those
who just can't think.

Five Reasons the EPA Should Not
Attempt to Deal with Global Warming. On April 17, the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) issued an endangerment finding, saying that global warming poses a serious threat to public health
and safety. Thus, almost anything that emits carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases could be regulated
under the Clean Air Act. This is the first official action taken by the federal government to regulate
carbon dioxide. The endangerment finding is the initial step in a long regulatory process that could
lead to the EPA requiring regulations for almost anything that emits carbon dioxide. Automobiles would
likely be the first target, but subsequent regulations could extend to a million or more buildings and small
businesses, including hospitals, schools, restaurants, churches, farms, and apartments.

Environmental
Protection, in Name Only. [Scroll down] There are two reasons for skepticism. First,
the EPA has long been a haven for zealots in career positions and for scientifically insupportable policies,
so it has little integrity to compromise. It has a sordid history of incompetence, duplicity, and
pandering to the most extreme factions of the environmental movement, all of which are likely to become even
worse during the Obama administration. Second, [Lisa] Jackson herself is a veteran of 16 years at
the EPA, during which she developed some of the agency's most unscientific, wasteful, and dangerous regulations.

Land Grab, Air Grab, Water
Grab — S 787. The CWA (Clean Water Act) regulates point source pollution discharges into
"waters of the United States." The United States Supreme Court has interpreted the phrase "waters of
the United States" to exclude isolated waters, such as ponds, intermittent streams, and wetlands which do not
have a "significant nexus" to a navigable waterway. These bodies of water are not regulated by the
CWA. S 787 would change the CWA to significantly broaden the scope of the bill.

The EPA keeps attending to smaller and smaller minutiae, in order to survive.EPA targets cement industry
emissions. The federal agency has proposed regulations that could cut mercury emissions 81% to 93% annually.
Industry representatives warn the rules would increase costs and could lead to outsourcing.

EPA: Greenhouse gases threat to human health.
Declaring that greenhouse gases are a significant threat to human health, the Environmental Protection Agency has
proposed listing carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases as pollutants under the Clean Air Act, a policy the Bush
administration rejected. The White House acknowledged that the EPA had transmitted its proposed finding on
global warming to the Office of Management and Budget, but provided no details.

An obvious power grab:EPA:
Global Warming Threatens Public Health, Welfare. The Environmental Protection Agency sent a proposal to the
White House on Friday [3/20/2009] finding that global warming is endangering the public's health and welfare, according to
several sources, a move that could have far-reaching implications for the nation's economy and environment.

EPA Move on Greenhouse Gases Puts Congress
on the Line. The EPA took a first step on Friday [4/17/2009] toward federal regulation of greenhouse gas
emissions, a move that will put pressure on Congress to address the issue through legislation. The agency issued a
"proposed endangerment finding" that says carbon dioxide and five other gases threaten public health and welfare by
triggering global climate change. The document also says emissions from motor vehicles are contributors to
global warming.

EPA
says farmers must keep dust down. Nothing says summer in Iowa like a cloud of dust behind a
combine. But what may be a fact of life for farmers is a cause for concern to federal regulators, who
are refusing to exempt growers from new environmental regulations. It's left some farmers feeling
bemused and more than a little frustrated.

Obama: A Red Diaper Baby.
Do believe that the U.S. military should be in the streets of America to enforce the actions of the federal
government "to prevent environmental damage"? ... The Environmental Protection Agency has just unveiled its
own version of the FBI Most Wanted list, unveiling a roster of 23 fugitives charged with environmental
offenses! The most environmentally committed President to have ever been elected will be in charge by
Noon on January 20, 2009 and the rise in gun sales across the nation suggests that a lot of people think
the government is about to become the enemy.

The
EPA's Most Wanted List: It's little wonder why the FBI's "Most Wanted" list doesn't include
anyone accused of breaking federal environmental laws. It's hard to argue that a father-son team accused
of illegally importing Alfa Romeo sports cars that don't meet U.S. tailpipe emissions standards is the criminal
equivalent of the likes of Usama bin Laden or the other hardened sociopaths for whom the FBI warns the public
to remain on the lookout. But the Environmental Protection Agency has now cured its apparent case of
outlaw-envy with the launch of its own "Wanted" list last week. Hoping to "track down environmental
fugitives," the agency wants to "increase the number of 'eyes' looking for environmental fugitives."

A List of the Most Wanted, by the
E.P.A.. The E.P.A.'s list, complete with mug shots of the fugitives, was established in
December to try to draw attention to serious environmental crimes. "We take them seriously, and
there are serious consequences," said Doug Parker, deputy director of the agency's criminal investigation
division.

Cap-and-trade — 'Largest
tax increase of all time'. Is the carbon dioxide that humans exhale a public danger? Yes,
according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA has released an endangerment finding on
carbon dioxide. The finding will allow the gas to be regulated under the Clean Air Act, something the
Act was not intended to do when it was enacted over 30 years ago. Aggressive cap-and-trade
measures are being debated on Capitol Hill and, if enacted, are rumored to rake in trillions of dollars for
the federal government and raise the cost of living for Americans by thousands of dollars.

Your EPA Mafia At Work. I
am increasingly of the opinion that the main goal of the Obama administration through CO2 regulation,
exploding deficits, punishing taxation, and any other means at their disposal is the destruction of the
economy and the complete control of impoverished Americans. This is an administration that exists to
impose an Orwellian socialist utopia when the smoke clears. When it comes to CO2, Obama, all of his
so-called science advisors, and the Environmental Protection Agency are all lying. A criminal fraud
is being perpetrated.

EPA Expected
to Regulate Carbon Dioxide for First Time. The Environmental Protection Agency is expected to act for the
first time to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, The New York Times reported on Wednesday [2/18/2009], citing senior
Obama administration officials. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has asked her staff to review the latest scientific
evidence and prepare documentation for a finding that greenhouse gas pollution endangers public health and welfare, the
newspaper said. There is wide expectation that Jackson will act by April 2, the second anniversary of a Supreme
Court decision that found that EPA has the authority to regulate greenhouse pollution under the U.S. Clean Air Act.

The EPA is fabricating and amplifying problems in order to justify its existence.The Quality of Science Matters.
With Dallas-Fort Worth's current ozone design value of 94 ppb, the new 75-ppb standard is formidable. And
although legally irrelevant, the EPA has conceded that the cost of attaining the new standard will outweigh the
health benefits by $20 billion in 2020. The new standard will classify 400 new counties nationwide into
nonattainment. In Texas, five additional urban areas will join the Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston-Galveston
regions under the federal nonattainment shackle. Characterized by the EPA as perhaps its most expensive rule
ever, this 75-ppb standard begs for solid scientific justification.

The Editor says...
If that is true, and I'm not sure it is, then apparently the Supreme Court's position is
that the EPA has more authority than the President.

Inhofe says the EPA is too
powerful, could damage economy. A key player in the years-long debate over climate change, the Oklahoma
Republican agreed that using the Clean Air Act to put new regulations in place would be an unprecedented expansion of the
Environmental Protection Agency's authority that would impact every household. "Obviously the concept of regulating
carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act is flawed and the act must be amended by Congress," Inhofe said. "Today's
notice should concern all lawmakers; no one should want the EPA to exercise the kind of power and authority that the
career staff at EPA contemplates."

Obama's Carbon Ultimatum. The EPA
hasn't made a secret of how it would like to centrally plan the U.S. economy under the 1970 Clean Air Act. In a
blueprint released in July, the agency didn't exactly say it'd collectivize the farms — but pretty close,
down to the "grass clippings." The EPA would monitor and regulate the carbon emissions of "lawn and garden
equipment" as well as everything with an engine, like cars, planes and boats. Eco-bureaucrats envision
thousands of other emissions limits on all types of energy.

The EPA is choking
democracy. One of the most important events of our lifetimes may have just transpired. A federal agency
has decided that it has the power to regulate everything, including the air you breathe. Nominally, the Environmental
Protection Agency's announcement last Friday only applies to new-car emissions. But pretty much everyone agrees that
the ruling opens the door to regulating, well, everything. According to the EPA, greenhouse gases include carbon
dioxide — the gas you exhale — as well as methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons
and sulfur hexafluoride. It is literally impossible to imagine a significant economic or human activity
that does not involve the production of one of these gases.

EPA 'Cow Tax' Could Charge $175
per Dairy Cow to Curb Greenhouse Gases. Call this one of the newest and innovative ways your
government has come up with to battle greenhouse gas emissions. Indirectly it could be considered a
cheeseburger tax, but one of the suggestions offered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in its
Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) for regulating greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air
Act is to levy a tax on livestock.

EPA
Presses Obama To Regulate Warming Under Clean Air Act. [Scroll down] William L. Kovacs, vice
president of environment, technology and regulatory affairs at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said an effort to
regulate greenhouse gases based on the EPA's scientific finding "will be devastating to the economy." "By
moving forward with the endangerment finding on greenhouse gases, EPA is putting in motion a set of decisions that
may have far-reaching unintended consequences," he said. "Specifically, once the finding is made, no matter
how limited, some environmental groups will sue to make sure it is applied to all aspects of the Clean Air Act."

Protect us from
the EPA. One man's meat may be another man's poison, but the Environmental Protection Agency
has taken the idea to an absurdity. EPA has just sent a proposal to the White House that would classify
carbon dioxide as a health hazard. But if there wasn't carbon dioxide around, there would be no
plants. And, for that matter, neither would there be any people or pets if we weren't allowed
to exhale.

EPA Supports Cap-and-Trade at Senate Mercury Hearings.
[A number of expert witnesses] pointed out the advances and challenges of new emission control technologies. Their
overall message was that technology cannot yet meet the strict standards the environmental activists seek to impose.
Experts also noted current environmental mercury levels are neither dangerous nor toxic to humans. Others pointed
out much of the nation's ambient mercury is carried here by wind currents from China and would thus be beyond the reach
of U.S. rules.

Bush to relax protected
species rules. Parts of the Endangered Species Act may soon be extinct. The Bush administration
wants federal agencies to decide for themselves whether highways, dams, mines and other construction projects
might harm endangered animals and plants.

Justices Say E.P.A.
Has Power to Act on Harmful Gases. In one of its most important environmental decisions in
years, the Supreme Court ruled on Monday [4/2/2007] that the Environmental Protection Agency has the
authority to regulate heat-trapping gases in automobile emissions.

Global
Warming Ruling Called 'Victory for the Bad Guys'. Global warming skeptics reacted strongly
Monday to a Supreme Court ruling that the Environmental Protection Agency has the power to regulate carbon
dioxide (CO2) emissions from cars, calling the decision "bad news" for the country and predicting that the
economic fallout will be "vast."

However...Supreme
Court Ruling Doesn't Mean EPA Will Regulate CO2 Emissions. The Environment Protection Agency is
not required to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from tailpipes, contrary to the impression fostered in media
reports about the U.S. Supreme Court's "rebuking the Bush Administration for its inaction." The court
simply ruled the EPA had the authority, not that they had the obligation, according to H. Sterling
Burnett, senior fellow with the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA).

Why put fish above
our civil liberties? We have a federal agency devoted entirely to ensuring that the environment
is protected before any significant project needed for the public good is allowed to go forward. Well
over $7 billion is spent each year by the Environmental Protection Agency. Private companies, and
state and local governments spend many times that in compliance costs.

Carbon Fiat.
[Scroll down] True, the EPA's ruling is a minor setback for the global warmists. But it may pour the
bureaucratic foundation for their larger policy goal, which is economy-wide regulation of carbon dioxide.
Worse, the Bush EPA may do so by rewriting current environmental law, with little or no political debate.

EPA Sludge Tests: A
"Modern-Day Tuskegee Experiment". The Associated Press reported April 13 that researchers
using federal grant money selected nine families in poor, black Baltimore neighborhoods to test if sludge
could reduce child health risks from lead. Sludge derived from human and industrial waste was tilled
into the families' yards and grass was planted over it.

It's not up to the EPA. If
global warming requires regulation, that is a decision for our elected representatives to make, says Jonathan
Adler, a professor of environmental and constitutional law at Case Western Reserve University School of Law.
Yet several states and environmentalist groups are asking the Supreme Court to force the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) to impose nationwide regulations on greenhouse gases, the most ubiquitous
byproducts of modern industrial society.

EPA Seeks To Have Water Vapor Classified As A Pollutant.
If successful, the push to classify water vapor as a dangerous pollutant would impact virtually everyone. For
instance, homeowners could see a wide variety of common activities that cause evaporation being regulated: watering
the lawn, or using a hot tub or swimming pool. "Right now, we are not so concerned about the water vapor exhaled by
people. That is low on our list of priorities", said Mr. Donaldson. "We'll tackle that manmade source at a
later time."

The Editor says...
Evidently he's not kidding. This is just another way the EPA, having outlived its usefulness, is
desperately looking for something to fix. How do you suppose Mr. Donaldson is going to keep the
lakes and oceans from producing water vapor?

New EPA Rules Punish Areas for Ozone Improvement.
A notable pattern is becoming apparent: EPA moves the goalposts every time most of the nation meets the then-present
ozone standard. The evidence shows this is not a health issue at all, but rather EPA's strategy to maintain
its substantial regulatory power over the American public. A review of the historical context of ozone
regulation confirms this agenda.

Testimony before a Texas
Senate Hearing on Wind Turbines: I have practiced medicine for 36 years in the United
States, and I assure you that people do not die from a change in temperature of 2 degrees or even 4,
they do not die from air pollution in the United States. Not one person. Killer air and toxic air
pollution are an historical problem, not a current problem, created by old industrial pollution more than
50 years ago, combined with a less capable medical system.

Experts Testify on Dangers of Junk Science at
EPA. The experts will testify that EPA has allowed "junk science" about health effects to
permeate its work and the national debate over public health regulations. The consequences are
catastrophic: Enormous public and private expenditures are being mandated to chase tiny and
hypothetical health risks. This not only wastes resources but diverts public attention from
true health problems.

"The risks [Superfund] addresses are worst-case, hypothetical present and future risks to the
maximum exposed individual, i.e., one who each day consumes two liters of water contaminated
by hazardous waste. The program at one time aimed to achieve a risk range in its cleanups
adequate to protect the child who regularly ate liters of dirt. ... And it formerly assumed
that all sites, once cleaned up, would be used for residential development, even though many
lie within industrial zones. Some of these assumptions have driven clean-up costs to stratospheric
levels and, together with liabilities associated with Superfund sites, have resulted in inner-city
sites suitable for redevelopment remaining derelict and unproductive."

E.P.A.
Says 17 States Can't Set Emission Rules. The Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday
[12/19/2007] denied California and 16 other states the right to set their own standards for carbon dioxide
emissions from automobiles. The E.P.A. administrator, Stephen L. Johnson, said the proposed
California rules were pre-empted by federal authority and made moot by the energy bill signed into law by
President Bush on Wednesday.

The Editor says...
California has had its own set of emissions rules for years. It's a little late for the EPA
to object now. It would be very amusing to see California take the EPA to the Supreme Court,
to demand its 10th Amendment rights.

Emissions decision draws
fire. Critics mounted a fierce attack on the Environmental Protection Agency's decision to deny
California and other states the right to impose strict vehicle tailpipe emissions limits, with House and Senate
committees demanding documents and many state governors vowing to sue to overturn the decision. President
Bush defended the federal agency's decision on Thursday [12/20/2007].

EPA Should Help States Required to Clean Up
Foreign Pollution. Walker County, Georgia Commissioner Bebe Heiskell recently testified to
Congress, "Walker County's non-attainment status is almost exclusively due to outside influences on our air
quality — including up to 60 percent natural particulate matter, transported from Alaska, Canada, and
amazingly Africa, which is completely out of our control."

EPA Proposed Rule Changes Standard With Little
Public Benefit. "Yet again, the EPA is moving the goal post in ozone regulation without
considering the cost to the states and local communities. Air quality has improved significantly
over the past 20 years due to innovative technology developed in the marketplace, not by the stroke
of a pen in the federal bureaucracy," said Utah Senate Majority Leader Curtis Bramble (R-Provo).

Finding Better Ways to Achieve Cleaner
Air: Air quality regulation is complicated. The Clean Air Act (CAA) is hundreds of pages
long, and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has written thousands of pages of compulsively detailed
regulations to implement the CAA requirements, along with tens of thousands of pages of guidance documents
explaining what the regulations mean.

Facts Not Fear on Air Pollution:
Perhaps the most harmful aspect of air quality regulation is that it has no negative feedbacks that would slow
down or stop its bureaucratic expansion. Regulators' jobs and power depend on a public perception that
air pollution is a serious and urgent problem. Regulators also set the level of the health standards,
meaning that they get to decide when their job is finished. Naturally, it never will be. The
bureaucratic incentives built into air quality regulation explain why regulators and activists work so hard to
make it appear that air pollution is still a serious problem, even as air pollution has reached historic lows
that have, at worst, minor effects on people's health.

Three Things to Know About Pollution:
(#1) Air quality in the United States has markedly improved. Between 1993 and 2002, aggregate emissions
of the six principle pollutants (nitrogen dioxide, ozone, sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, carbon monoxide
and lead) decreased 19 percent. During the same time period, United States gross domestic product
grew at an average of 5.15 percent annually. Volatile organic compound emissions from cars and
trucks have fallen 73.8 percent since 1970, and carbon monoxide emissions from cars have been reduced
64 percent.

Phony Science Begets Phony Public Policy.
Many Americans find tobacco smoke to be a nuisance. … But how successful would anti-smokers have been in
a court of law, or public opinion, in achieving the kind of success they've achieved based on tobacco smoke
being a nuisance? A serious public health threat had to be manufactured, and in 1993 the Environmental
Protection Agency stepped in to the rescue with their bogus environmental tobacco smoke study that says
secondhand tobacco smoke is a class A carcinogen.

Farmers, Cattlemen Challenge New EPA Soot
Rules. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) new rule requiring a 50 percent
reduction in fine particulate matter allowable over a 24-hour period subjects farmers, cattlemen, and
businessmen to inappropriately strict new standards, according to petitions filed December 18 with the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Farmers and cattlemen, in particular, argued the rule will
unjustifiably impose unprecedented regulations on dust kicked up by centuries-old agricultural practices.

Scientific Evidence Shows Secondhand Smoke Is No Danger.
In 1992 EPA published its report, "Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking," claiming [second-hand smoke] is a serious
public health problem, that it kills approximately 3,000 nonsmoking Americans each year from lung cancer, and that it is a
Group A carcinogen (like benzene, asbestos, and radon). [But] in November 1995 after a 20-month study, the
Congressional Research Service released a detailed analysis of the EPA report that was highly critical of EPA's methods and
conclusions. In 1998, in a devastating 92-page opinion, Federal Judge William Osteen vacated the EPA study, declaring
it null and void. He found a culture of arrogance, deception, and cover-up at the agency.

Vegetable Producers Sued for Air
Pollution. Environmental activist groups in California filed a lawsuit December 27 in the
U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco claiming the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency should declare the San
Joaquin Valley in nonattainment with federal particulate matter (PM) guidelines. The lawsuit makes good on
threats by the activist group Earthjustice to challenge air quality throughout the San Joaquin Valley region.

Administration Selling Environmentalist Window
Insurance. "Climate Czarina" Carol Browner sat down with the press this weekend, offering her
best mob enforcer impersonation. She announced the Obama administration is offering "window insurance"
to industry because, well, otherwise, you never know what could happen. ... That's because ... the administration
was also preparing to let that stone-throwing EPA over there out of its cage. If business sued for peace
and negotiated the terms of their own execution, why, they wouldn't have to worry about the beast getting
loose, in which case she just couldn't promise what it might do.

Carbon Regulation: One
Scientist's Unscientific Dream? There's an understandably growing unease about the likely prospect that
the Obama administration will soon choose to regulate CO2 as a pollutant. But that disquiet would likely turn
quickly to rage if more people knew the truth about the scientific conclusions on which this unprecedented incursion
on both industry and individual freedom was based. You see, it appears that those conclusions weren't based on
accepted scientific procedure at all, but were instead predetermined — and perhaps by a single man.

Stop the EPA
Before it Destroys America! If the Environmental Protection Agency were some benign government
unit tucked away in the corner of some massive federal government building, we could safely conclude it was
doing its job to keep the nation's air and water clean. It is the very antithesis of that. It is a
Green Gestapo that has wreaked havoc with all aspects of the nation's industrial and agricultural communities,
run roughshod over property rights, declared puddles to be navigable waters, and removed invaluable,
beneficial chemicals from use to protect the lives and property of all Americans.

Reckless 'Endangerment'.
President Obama's global warming agenda has been losing support in Congress, but why let an irritant like
democratic consent interfere with saving the world? So last Friday the Environmental Protection Agency
decided to put a gun to the head of Congress and play cap-and-trade roulette with the U.S. economy. The
pistol comes in the form of a ruling that carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant that threatens the public
and therefore must be regulated under the 1970 Clean Air Act.

EPA Says CO2 a Threat to Human Health. Institute for
Energy Research (IER) president Thomas J. Pyle today issued the following statement in response to the
announcement by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that carbon dioxide is a threat to human health and
welfare, and as such: must be regulated, rationed and restricted by the federal government.

The Great Government CO2 Power Grab. The inevitable has
happened. The Obama government has declared CO2 — a nutrient required by plants to live,
and a gas exhaled with your every breath — a pollutant. Let there be rejoicing in the ranks of
activists.

When Expenses Outweigh Benefits.
Should the Environmental Protection Agency place limits on carbon dioxide emissions, the costs to the oil industry, its
customers and consumers in general will be stiff. Fighting global warming is not cheap.

EPA Says It Will Toss 18th Century
Artifacts into a Landfill. Less than a week after the Environmental Protection Agency restarted
a controversial dredging project on the Hudson River, dredgers operated by the General Electric Company
dislodged wooden beams that are the last remnants of one of the largest British forts in the American colonies.
The EPA now says that the beams are contaminated with potential carcinogens known as PCBs and therefore must
be buried in a landfill.

The EPA tightens air pollution standards in order to justify its existence

Slowly the screws are turned, until at last there is no energy, no industry, no economy remaining.

Air Pollution Cut in Half, EPA
Announces. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has achieved a major milestone
in its 34-year battle against air pollution. As Administrator Michael Leavitt announced
on September 22 [2004], "emissions have been cut by more than half (51 percent) since the
Clean Air Act was passed in 1970." Unfortunately, recent polls show the public is unaware
that things have improved at all.

But that's not enough.EPA Clears Way to Regulate
Small Engines. The Environmental Protection Agency cleared the way Friday [3/17/2006] for
regulations to limit pollution from lawn mowers, jet skis and similar small machines. … Without new
pollution controls, engines under 50 horsepower would account for 18 percent of smog-forming
emissions from mobile sources by 2020, the agency has estimated.

Even as the air gets cleaner every year, the EPA will always be able to
find something to regulate, by looking for smaller and smaller problems.

EPA proposing
limits on mower emissions. Engine-powered push mowers and riding mowers account for up to
ten percent of summertime smog-forming emissions in some parts of the country. … The proposal
effects [sic] engines under 50 horsepower. The action would cut smog-forming emissions from
the engines by 35 percent.

Small Engine Rule to Bring Big Emissions Cuts.
With this proposed rule, nonroad gasoline-powered engines, such as those used in lawn and garden equipment,
would see an additional 35 percent reduction in HC and NOx emissions beyond a 60 percent reduction
that finished phasing in last year under an earlier rulemaking.

EPA Proposing Limits on Mower Emissions.
Engines under 50 horsepower, which are mostly used to power walk-behind and riding mowers, account
for up to 10 percent of summertime smog emissions from mobile sources in some parts of the country. The
Environmental Protection Agency has been considering a proposal that would cut smog-forming emissions from the
engines by roughly 40 percent. [Emphasis added to show that the article describes
the worst-case problem and the best possible results from the proposed new regulations.]

This is proof that the EPA is running out of things to do. There just aren't that many lawnmowers.
The average lawnmower is only a few years old, and only runs a couple of hours per month. If a lawnmower is
in good enough condition to start up and run reliably, it's probably not causing extraordinary
pollution. These new EPA rules are simply a means of keeping the EPA alive -- much
like their latest effort to try to regulate
the dust kicked
up by farm tractors.

The
Lawnmower Men: Al Gore blew into Washington on Thursday, warning that "our very way of
life" is imperiled if the U.S. doesn't end "the carbon age" within 10 years. No one seriously
believes such a goal is even remotely plausible. But if you want to know what he and his acolytes
think this means in practice, the Environmental Protection Agency has just published the instruction
manual. Get ready for the lawnmower inspector near you.

Cleaner mower, speedboat engines ordered.
Gasoline-powered lawnmowers that are a big cause of summertime air pollution will have to be dramatically
cleaner under rules issued Thursday [9/4/2008] by the Environmental Protection Agency. The long-awaited
regulation requires a 35 percent reduction in emissions from new lawn and garden equipment beginning in
2011. Big emission reductions are also required for speedboats and other recreational watercraft,
beginning in 2010.

Farmers target EPA report
they say might tax cows. For farmers, this stinks: Belching and gaseous cows and hogs could start
costing them money if the federal government decides to charge fees for air-polluting animals. Farmers so far are
turning their noses up at the notion, which they contend is a possible consequence of an Environmental Protection Agency
report after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that greenhouse gases from motor vehicles amounts to air pollution.
"This is one of the most ridiculous things the federal government has tried to do," said Alabama Agriculture Commissioner
Ron Sparks, an outspoken opponent of the fees.

Report says US air quality has
improved in past decade. U.S. residents can breathe a bit easier than they did a decade
ago, as the number of days that air quality was deemed unhealthy has fallen, according to a report
by the American Lung Association on Thursday [4/27/2006].

EPA Makes Mistakes in Proposed New Air Quality
Standards. Over the past three decades, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has
repeatedly ratcheted up restrictions and regulatory burdens to regulate ever-decreasing air pollutant
emissions, often with no discernable effect on human health. This process is continuing with EPA's
proposed 2006 ambient air standards. … "There is a greater relative risk of whole milk causing lung
cancer than the relative risk EPa has shown for air pollution."

Top Ten Junk Science Stories of the
Past Decade: EPA air pollution rules issued in 1997 governing airborne particulate
matter (soot) are estimated to cost $10 billion annually. The EPA claimed soot in ambient
air causes tens of thousands of premature deaths every year. Congress asked the EPA to disclose
the scientific data underlying the claims. EPA refused. A subsequently enacted law requiring
that taxpayer-funded scientific data used to support regulation be made available to the public
through the Freedom of Information Act has yet to be enforced.

EPA Whips Up Air Pollution Scare: As
it turns out, the study was funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which conveniently just
started a rulemaking process in January that would make outdoor air quality standards more stringent.
The study was released on March 7, in time for the March 8 newspapers — the same day
that the EPA held a public hearing in Chicago on the need for new air pollution standards.

Outdated Car-Mileage Tests Steer Buyers
Off Course. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's test for mileage hasn't changed since
1974. Consequently, the tests likely overstate the actual mileage, note observers. The EPA's
"current" mileage tests assume that no one drives more than 60 miles per hour when many states have
set the limit at 65 or higher since 1995. And they assume that no one uses air
conditioning, which can cut mileage by as much as 21 percent.

Clinton's EPA Chief Springs the Mercury Trap She Left
for Bush. Although she served as President Clinton's EPA chief for eight years, Carol Browner
never imposed a crackdown on power-plant mercury emissions. But between Bush's election and inauguration,
she proposed an expensive, technically infeasible mercury plan — for her successor. It was an
effort to trap Bush by giving him the choice of imposing a draconian policy — or face condemnation
by the left for supposedly being "weak" on the environment.

Oiling the Green Political
Machine. Did taxpayers unknowingly help fund the 2004 election campaign to
unseat President Bush? Ignored by the media, a Senate probe has found grants from
the Environmental Protection Agency financing a host of anti-Bush political lobbies and
activist groups.

Finding Cancer Just About Everywhere: New
guidelines proposed last April [1996] by the EPA would enable the agency to label virtually anything it wants
as cancer-causing — regardless of what the science says, according to agency-watchers. Critics
say that while science has never been EPA's strong suit, past EPA cancer risk assessments were at least rooted
in science by its traditional guidelines.

Environmental Frauds: EPA
Administrator Christie Todd Whitman is the cover girl on the May 27 [2002] issue of
Insight because the Environmental Protection Agency is being investigated by its Office of
Inspector General (OIG) and the FBI. Central to the controversy is the $100,000 to
$250,000 investment interest of Whitman and her husband in Citigroup. Critics claim this
influenced a Super-fund settlement that was allegedly too favorable to Shattuck Chemical Co. or
the decision to exclude most of lower Manhattan from the disaster zone surrounding the World
Trade Center. Former EPA ombudsman Robert Martin states that he was forced out after
launching a probe into the potential conflict of interest. While Martin's files were
said to be meticulously indexed before being shipped to the OIG's office, they arrived in no
discernable order — leading to suspicions that they had been stripped of embarrassing
investigative reports.

Science and the Environment:
There is a deliberate and quite outspoken attack on the whole idea of people owning private property. Mr.
William Riley, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, has said publicly on a number of
occasions that he does not believe that people should have the right to own private property.

Critics Wonder What's Afoot at EPA. The
Environmental Protection Agency has been spending more money, but doing a lot less, according to the agency's
own documents and Congressional records. Critics say the agency's productivity and effectiveness seem
to be dropping.

Why
Socialism Causes Pollution: So many new controls have been proposed and enacted that the late
economic journalist Warren Brookes once forecast that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could well
become "the most powerful government agency on earth, involved in massive levels of economic, social, scientific,
and political spending and interference."

The
War on Radon: Few Join Up. The EPA has decided that radon is the number one environmental
health risk in America: worse than pesticides and worse than hazardous waste. Judging from the panic
caused by environmental scares such as Alar on apples and chemicals from hazardous waste sites, one might expect
the nation's "number one risk" to incite near hysteria. Yet radon has failed to instill widespread fear
in the public mind.

EPA Global Warming Report Violates White House Agreement
to Settle Lawsuit: As a result of the lawsuit filed in October 2000, the Bush Administration
ultimately agreed in September 2001 to withdraw the National Assessment and stated that its unlawfully
produced conclusions are "not policy positions or official statements of the U.S. government." EPA has
ignored this agreement in issuing its report to the United Nations.

EPA enforcer quits with a flourish,
joins left-leaning activist group: Eric Schaeffer, a 47-year-old attorney and former director of
EPA's office of regulatory enforcement, had already lined up a job with the Rockefeller Family Fund when he made
his public resignation. The Rockefeller Family Fund champions outside-the-mainstream environmental issues
and funds a variety of environmental activist groups. The Fund has criticized environmental enforcement
as too lax even in the Clinton era.

Is EPA Out of
Control?: In March 1999, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit struck down the Environmental Protection Agency's new air quality standards. The
court found that EPA ignored reliable scientific evidence suggesting that tightening the ozone
standard could harm public health. The court also ruled that since the agency's
interpretation of the Clean Air Act provided no "intelligible principle" to justify its
actions, the interpretation was unconstitutional.

Attorneys
General Versus the EPA: The latest corrected temperature data from satellite
and weather balloon observations, and to a lesser extent from surface measurement, suggest
strongly that the earth's warming trend since the late 1970s has been slight, and that the
climate models predicting substantial anthropogenic (resulting from human activities) warming
are afflicted with significant modeling error. … Efforts to regulate carbon dioxide
emissions fundamentally are an effort to achieve "taxation by regulation," that is, wealth
redistribution for politically favored groups outside the formal structure of government
budgeting through taxation and expenditures.

Anti-science Policies
from EPA: Carol Browner's own Scientific Advisory Panel … rejected
the EPA's proposal to declare the nation's highest-use herbicide, atrazine, a "likely
carcinogen." Few papers covered it, and the most prominent, USA Today, got the
story backward. It declared: "The most commonly used herbicide in the
USA has been upgraded from a 'possible' to a 'likely' carcinogen in a draft report
prepared by scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency."

Regulatory Excess: In response
to a lawsuit filed by the American Lung Association, an EPA-funded lobbying group, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency has imposed ever more stringent standards on ground-level
ozone and particulates. These standards are based on inadequate science and wildly
unrealistic cost/benefit figures, yet EPA Administrator Carol Browner ignored comments put
forth during the formal review process and zealously moved ahead.

The Environmental Propaganda
Agency: Seven years after the U.S. Congress ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to
conduct a cost-benefit analysis of the Clean Air Act, the EPA submitted a report greatly exaggerating its
achievements. The agency's 1999 follow-up study on air pollution continues to place bureaucratic
imperatives above the search for truth.

Supreme Court Rules EPA Can Override States on
Environment. In an ongoing fight between states and the federal government over control of
environmental policy, the federal government has notched an important victory in the U.S. Supreme Court.
Other such disputes are currently in the courts, so it will soon become apparent whether this decision shifts
the balance of environmental power further towards the federal government.

Can No One Stop the
EPA? In the case of new EPA standards for particulate matter and ozone, the actions and policies
of unelected federal regulators, even when highly questionable, can go unchallenged and unchecked.

More Junk Science from EPA: EPA
insists on including highly speculative but enormous estimates of the health effects of reducing particulate
matter concentrations.

EPA Games: What doesn't Carol Browner want
us to know about her zealously activist reign at the Environmental Protection Agency? Someone was playing
games at EPA all right. It wasn't just Browner's little boy.

New Cars are Dramatically Cleaner than Recent
Models. Over the long term, these new standards signal nothing short of the end to air pollution
as we know it. "Even after accounting for growth, total vehicle emissions will decline more than
80 percent during the next twenty years or so," concludes American Enterprise Institute visiting fellow
Joel Schwartz, author of No Way Back: Why Air Pollution Will Continue to Decline. At those
levels, any lingering public health threat from air pollution would virtually cease to exist.

Editor's Note: After reading
the above article, it sounds
as if we no longer need the Environmental Protection Agency. Their
work is finished! But what are the chances that the EPA (or any other federal agency)
will go out of business when its goal is accomplished?

EPA
Expected to Declare Carbon Dioxide a Dangerous Pollutant. Don't exhale. That advice may
need heeding if the Environmental Protection Agency declares carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases
dangerous pollutants, a move — expected in the next couple weeks — that would require
the federal government to impose new rules limiting emissions. But some skeptics say regulating carbon
dioxide, a byproduct of burning fossil fuels, may be a difficult task, especially since people emit carbon
dioxide with every breath.

Say no to the supersized TV, EPA hints.
How big is too big when it comes to TV screen size? How much energy does the U.S. gobble up watching television?
If you ask the Environmental Protection Agency, the answers would be (a) anything over 50 inches
and (b) about 4 percent of all household electricity. "There are about 275 million TVs
currently in use in the U.S., consuming over 50 billion kWh of energy each year — or
4 percent of all households' electricity use.

The 'Absurd Results'
Doctrine. The EPA has now formally made an "endangerment finding" on CO2, which will impose the
commandand-control regulations of the Clean Air Act across the entire economy. ... In any case, the point of
this reckless "endangerment" is to force industry and politicians wary of raising taxes to concede, lest
companies have to endure even worse economic and bureaucratic destruction from the EPA.

Obama's EPA
is a regulator reborn. To appreciate the extent to which the Environmental Protection Agency
under President Obama is a regulator reborn, consider this: EPA officials have begun to cut air
pollution by invoking the Clean Water Act. Long quiescent under President George W. Bush, the
agency is churning out initiatives and regulations at a pace that pleases its friends in the environmental
movement and frightens many in the business community.

EPA Lawyers: Cap-And-Trade
'Fatally Flawed'. After stifling a report questioning the science behind climate change, the
EPA is censoring two of its lawyers for saying the proposed solutions are also problematical. The
debate isn't over. It's being suppressed. In the proud tradition of EPA whistle-blower Alan
Carlin, whose leaked study blew the lid off the EPA's hyped and flawed science behind climate change, two
EPA lawyers, Laurie Williams and Allan Zabel, have produced a Web video titled "A Huge Mistake." In it
they say cap-and-trade in general and the Waxman-Markey bill in particular are the wrong answers anyway.

The EPA and Me. The environmental
movement has become so radical as to be an easily identified hazard to American life, and the EPA is not on my list of
favorite agencies. The final straw came when they threatened fines because our firemen washed their fire engines
in a building that didn't have the right kind of drain.

The New
Socialism. On the day Copenhagen opened, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency claimed
jurisdiction over the regulation of carbon emissions by declaring them an "endangerment" to human health.
Since we operate an overwhelmingly carbon-based economy, the EPA will be regulating practically everything.

Global
Warming as a Political Tool. As part of the enduring statist desire to penetrate ever deeper
into every nook and cranny of our lives, Greens have wanted to find a way for the government to regulate
CO2, a natural byproduct of fire and breathing, for decades. Now they can. That is why the
White House will use [Lisa] Jackson as a Medusa's head, to petrify cap-and-trade opponents with the
prospect of something even worse: the effective seizing of the means of production.

The Politicization of the EPA — an Administration's
Radical Gamble. [Scroll down] The U.S. president who was going to find a way to resolve
partisan bickering in Washington has now embarked on a major escalation of the conflict — by
using the power he holds over executive branch agencies to fight his enemies in Congress over the issue
of global warming. Although the EPA has always been, organizationally, an arm of the administration
in power, until this administration the EPA has generally been able to maintain the appearance (if not
the reality) of being science-based. That is now much harder to maintain.

Reactions to E.P.A.'s Climate Finding.
The Environmental Protection Agency declared Monday that greenhouse gases, 23 percent of which come
from car and truck tailpipes, "threaten the public health and welfare of the American people." The
so-called endangerment finding was not unexpected and allows the E.P.A. to complete its standards for
greenhouse-gas emissions and fuel economy for model years 2012-16 (when cars will be expected to reach
the equivalent of 35.5 miles a gallon combined).

Tyranny of the EPA.
It's the rage, you know, this religious-like dogma about a global warming apocalypse in the absence of
turning everything upside down. There's a world summit on the issue in Copenhagen, and even the
U.S. Supreme Court got on board two years ago, saying the EPA should regulate carbon dioxide and other
suspected greenhouse gases if they were hammering human health. The EPA has now said it is doing
just that, although EPA knows no such thing, cannot in fact begin to know any such thing.

Finding Cancer Just About Everywhere: New
guidelines proposed last April [1996] by the Environmental Protection Agency would enable the agency to label
virtually anything it wants as cancer-causing — regardless of what the science says, according to
agency-watchers. Critics say that while science has never been EPA's strong suit, past EPA cancer risk
assessments were at least rooted in science by its traditional guidelines.

Cleaner Air Brings Dirtier Tricks. Since
1970, the total national emissions of the six principal pollutants the EPA tracks have been cut 48 percent,
even as energy consumption increased 42 percent and the population increased 38 percent. Fine particle
emissions, technically known as PM2.5 (because it refers to particulate matter 2.5 micrometers or smaller
in size, about 1/30 the width of a human hair) have only been tracked since 1993, but by 2002 had fallen
17 percent. In terms of air quality, they have only been measured since 1998 but by 2003 had
dropped eight percent.

What a Piece of Work.
Karl Marx was a demon sent from hell, but he said a mouthful when he said that "all history is the history of
class struggle." Maybe what we are seeing now is class struggle between the academics and bureaucrats
and the business people and oil people and utility people. Maybe that's what this recent tomfool notion
of declaring CO2, a life-giving gas, a dangerous pollutant is. If the government can have a right to
control CO2 emissions, it can control every aspect of life everywhere.

The Surprise at Copenhagen.
The EPA, stalled by the Bush administration, slowly moved through various required hoops to substantiate that CO2 is in
fact a "greenhouse gas" and amongst several others is causing global warming. Once President Obama took office, the EPA
was unleashed. On April 17, 2009, the EPA declared CO2 and five other "greenhouse gases" a potential danger.
According to their own findings, they relied heavily on the now-suspect IPCC data, much of which is tainted by the
"Climategate" files.

House
delays EPA reach into wetlands. Plans to rush through the House of Representatives legislation
that would expand the scope of the Clean Water Act, the main tool for keeping the nation's waters clean, have
proved to be too ambitious. Rep. James L. Oberstar, chairman of the House Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee, last week shelved his goal of introducing and passing his water legislation
before Congress goes on vacation Friday.

Spare Us
Another "Stimulus". Businesses must spend money to make money. It's expensive to
invent, test and develop new products, and it can take years before they pay off. Government
doesn't work that way. Washington, D.C. spends money to hire people to enforce laws and
regulations. Years, even decades later, those federal employees will still be toiling away on
Uncle Sam's dime (that is, yours and mine as taxpayers), even if the problem they were hired to
address has ceased to exist.

...and the EPA is a perfect example.

"Government
bureaucracies and public institutions have a unique way of signaling that they
no longer serve any purpose and it's time to eliminate or drastically reform them. They
do so by conducting themselves in a manner that demonstrates self preservation has become their
one and only objective."

The Obama
doctrine: govern by decree. As you exhale while reading this article, you are
contributing to the coming world catastrophe caused by global warming. So says the Environmental
Protection Agency in its recent decree that carbon dioxide is an air pollutant, among those gases that
"endanger" public health. In response to this sense of crisis stirred by the likes of Al Gore,
President Obama pushes for mandates that significantly reduce carbon usage, and which, by all accounts,
will cripple the U.S. economy.

This Land Is EPA's Land.
The Clean Water Act is being rewritten to give a government bureaucracy the power to regulate every body of water
from the Mississippi River to a rain-flooded field. The first casualty may be American coal. ... The 1972
Clean Water Act was originally intended to protect the "navigable waters of the United States" — you
know, the kind boats travel down. It was broadly and quickly interpreted to any pool of water in America
capable of supporting a bathtub variety boat.

The EPA's Power
Grab. [Scroll down] The Clean Air Act (CAA), enacted in 1970 and last updated in 1990, is
an abysmal policy mechanism for controlling greenhouse gases, and was never intended for this kind of problem.
But the EPA's gambit is not about policy — it is all about politics. ... In a nutshell,
environmental statutes and case law have evolved so as to make federal judges into the sock puppets of
environmentalists, and greens have become highly skilled in bringing lawsuits to compel federal agencies
to do their bidding.

Big
Brother, can you spare a dime? [Scroll down slowly] No, it was scary then for the same
reason it is scary now... Not because it is "health care" but because it is "nationalized." [M. Stanton]
Evans demonstrated in his 1976 lecture that government spending on social problems does not make them go
away; it just institutionalizes them. In fact, it ensures that the problems will never go away because
the problems become a magnet for federal dollars, and thus there is an incentive for the problems to grow
rather than shrink.

EPA Scientist Silenced in Coverup.
Monday's declaration by the Environmental Protection Administration that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse
gases endanger public health is apparently a regulatory fraud. It was made after EPA regulators refused
to consider a report from a leading EPA scientist rejecting the theory that emission of greenhouse gases
causes global warming.

Total control is apparently the goal:The EPA's Goldilocks Rule.
As thoroughly discussed in the media, the issues associated with regulating such a ubiquitous compound as carbon
dioxide pose many problems. Carbon dioxide's overwhelming contribution is by natural sources, it is well
mixed in the atmosphere, it permeates the entire globe, and it is inherently linked to our modern world.
There is literally no human activity that cannot be controlled by regulating carbon dioxide as a pollutant.

Global warming
alarmism is an all-purpose tyranny. If government can assume authority over emissions of CO2
generated by everything from factories to vehicles to people exhaling, then government can control everything.
The statist goal of overseeing all aspects of life advanced grotesquely with the quasiscience of global warming
alarmism. It proved the all-encompassing excuse to regulate, to tax and to license greenhouse gas emissions
under the pretense of saving the planet from rising temperatures.

EPA Proposes Stricter Smog
Standard. The United States Environmental Protection Agency proposed today [1/7/2010] new health standards
for smog, or ground-level ozone. Smog ... is not emitted directly into the air, but rather is created
through a process of chemicals, nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that combine in
the air and are heated by the sun to form ozone.

US
to Set Stricter Limits on Smog. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has proposed the
strictest health standards to date for smog in the United States. The proposed range of 60-70 parts per
billion during an eight-hour period is what scientists recommended during the former Bush administration.
However, after industries protested, then-President George W. Bush intervened to set the standard above
what was advised.

The Editor says...
So what? Maybe Bush was given bad advice. This latest move by the EPA is obviously more about
grabbing and holding onto power than about cleaning the air. Dallas supposedly has some of the most
polluted air in the country, according to the EPA, but as a person who lives and works in Dallas County,
I can report that on the worst summer day, the air is not bad at all. Any improvements resulting from
the EPA's proposed new rules (or the EPA's continued existence!) will go unnoticed by the general public.

EPA
proposes nation's strictest smog limits ever. The Environmental Protection Agency proposed the
nation's strictest-ever smog limits Thursday [1/7/2010], a move that could put large parts of California and
other states in violation of federal air quality regulations. The EPA proposed allowing a ground-level
ozone concentration of between 60 and 70 parts per billion, down from the 75-ppb standard adopted
under President George W. Bush in 2008. That means cracking down further on the emissions from
cars, trucks, power plants, factories and landfills.

You
Have to Watch Both of Obama's Hands. The Environmental Protection Agency is proposing
tighter regulation of smog-causing pollutants. There is a debate over the likely effect of the
new rules on health, but no question that they will prove costly. The EPA puts the cost to manufacturers
and local governments at between $19 billion and $90 billion per year by 2020. Because the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says "the causes of asthma remain unclear," the EPA is on uncertain
ground in claiming the new standards will reduce smog-related ailments and deaths.

EPA's plan to set water-quality standards in
Florida, a national first. In a move cheered by environmental groups, the federal government on Friday
[1/15/2010] proposed stringent limits on "nutrient" pollution allowed to foul Florida's waterways. The
ruling — which will cost industries and governments more than a billion dollars to comply — marks
the first time the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has intervened to set a state's water-quality standards.

Grassley:
Murkowski measure to block EPA rules unlikely to pass. An amendment to block the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) from regulating greenhouse gas emissions is unlikely to succeed, a supporter conceded
Tuesday [1/19/2010]. Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) said that not even all 40 Republicans may be on board
with a proposed measure from Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) to forestall the EPA from regulating emissions.

Senators Want to Bar E.P.A. Greenhouse
Gas Limits. In a direct challenge to the Environmental Protection Agency's authority, Senator Lisa
Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, introduced a resolution on Thursday [1/21/2010] to prevent the agency from
taking any action to regulate carbon dioxide and other climate-altering gases.

The Editor says...
Bias alert: How does the New York Times writer know with any certainty that carbon dioxide
is a climate-altering gas? Carbon dioxide is a natural part of the atmosphere, and it isn't
necessarily altering anything.

Three
Dems Back Effort to Halt Global Warming Regulation. Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska
is leading the charge to block the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gasses, and
today [1/21/2010] she got some support from across the aisle: Three Democratic senators signed onto
Murkowski resolution to bar such regulation.

EPA Sets Stricter
Air-Quality Standards Near Roads. The Obama administration set stricter limits on the amount of
nitrogen dioxide in the air for short periods of time along busy roads and is requiring states to install
monitoring equipment in big urban areas in an effort to crack down on pollution during periods of high
traffic. Vehicles are a major source of nitrogen dioxide, which can cause respiratory problems.

The Editor says...
It is interesting that the EPA is now seeking to monitor air quality at "worst case" locations.
Unmanned monitors can only measure a problem; enforcement or mitigation is sure to be completely infeasible.
But consider for a moment the pointlessness of all this. Short term exposure to automobile fumes has
never been considered a problem until now. Nobody lives by the side of the road, and if there are such
people, air quality is not the greatest of their worries. The EPA is desperately looking for
something to do.

EPA
should put carbon regs on hold. Evidence is steadily mounting that the United Nation's
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report is fundamentally flawed because of political and ideological
bias and manipulation of data. Concerns about those problems are among the reasons the campaign to pass
a cap-and-trade bill in Congress has slowed. Meanwhile, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator
Lisa Jackson continues hell-bent to regulate every nook and cranny of the U.S. economy that depends on
carbon-based energy, which is to say pretty much all of it.

States
struggling with EPA rules. States are slashing funds for environmental programs, threatening
their ability to meet federal standards for clean air and water. All but two states, Montana and North
Dakota, have made significant cuts to initiatives ranging from toxic waste cleanup to sewage treatment, says
Steve Brown, executive director for Environmental Council of the States, which unites state agencies.

The Environmentalism
Fraud: [Scroll down] At this moment, the EPA is hopelessly politicized. In the wake
of Carol Browner, it is probably better to shut it down and start over. What we need is a new organization
much closer to the FDA. We need an organization that will be ruthless about acquiring verifiable results,
that will fund identical research projects to more than one group, and that will make everybody in this field
get honest fast.

Virginia
challenges EPA's stance on global warming. Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli turned up the
heat on global warming yesterday [2/16/2010]. On behalf of the state, Cuccinelli filed a petition asking
the federal Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider its December finding that global warming poses a
threat to people.

VA
AG challenges EPA on CO2. Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli has officially petitioned the
Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider its December 15 endangerment finding that links carbon
dioxide emissions with man-made global warming. The regulatory finding is widely seen as an end-run
around stalled cap-and-trade legislation in the U.S. Senate.

A Green Tea Party:
A revolt against economic hardship imposed by unelected bureaucrats based on junk science is brewing.
This Tea Party movement wants the faulty finding on carbon dioxide to be reviewed and dumped.

EPA,
Countering Critics of Greenhouse Gas Findings, Says 'Science Is Settled'. The EPA says it is
going forward with "common sense measures that are helping to protect Americans from this threat" and said
its critics are trying to "stall progress." The Environmental Protection Agency, responding [to]
complaints about its December findings about the threat of greenhouse gases, issued a statement Friday [2/19/2010]
saying that the "science is settled" and "greenhouse gases pose a real threat to the American people."

The EPA's Carbon Footprint:
The immediate consequence of the sweeping new EPA authority will be more stringent regulation of automobiles.
Section 202 of the Clean Air Act requires the EPA to adopt emission controls once an "endangerment" finding is
made. In September, anticipating that finding, the EPA and the National Highway Transportation Safety
Administration proposed new regulations that would effectively require automakers to produce cars and light
trucks with an average fuel efficiency rating of 35.5 miles per gallon by 2016.

Cuccinelli fights the EPA.
Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli took a gutsy and intelligent step Feb. 17 when he petitioned the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider its ill-advised "finding" that carbon dioxide creates an
endangerment for human health. The endangerment finding would let the EPA battle alleged global warming
by regulating emissions of CO2, which of course is the gas that every animal and person exhales with every
breath. The finding was ludicrous from the start, and now Mr. Cuccinelli makes a reasonable case that
it also was unlawful.

EPA's global-warming
power grab. To avoid a potentially messy vote, President Obama's Environmental Protection Agency
has turned to the administrative rule-making process to impose climate-control regulations. In December,
the agency made an "endangerment finding" that declared that six gases — including the carbon dioxide
you are exhaling as you read this — are putting the planet's well-being in peril. The first
major rule based on this finding will be finalized next month. President George W. Bush's EPA
administrator, Stephen L. Johnson, warned that such a finding would result in a major government
power grab.

Alabama one of three states
suing the EPA. Alabama is one of three states suing the Environmental Protection Agency for its
December ruling that greenhouse gases are a danger to the public health. Attorney General Troy King has
filed a petition with the federal appeals court in the District of Columbia asking the court to review the
EPA's decision.

Fuel
Taxes Must Rise, Harvard Researchers Say. To meet the Obama administration's targets for cutting
greenhouse gas emissions, some researchers say, Americans may have to experience a sobering reality: gas
at $7 a gallon. To reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the transportation sector 14 percent from 2005
levels by 2020, the cost of driving would simply have to increase, according to a forthcoming report by
researchers at Harvard's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. The 14 percent
target was set in the Environmental Protection Agency's budget for fiscal 2010.

$7-A-Gallon
Gas Needed to Meet Government's CO2 Cuts. As the national average of gasoline creeps to three dollars
a gallon, economists are warning that high gas prices in the United States could slow the economic recovery.
Other countries' economies are recovering more quickly and increased production and activity is putting upward
pressure on oil prices. That coupled with a relatively weak US dollar spells trouble for American drivers.
Throw in carbon dioxide cuts and gasoline prices could reach unprecedented levels.

EPA Blames 'The
Simpsons' for Bad PR. Amid a pitched battle over her agency's planned climate regulations,
U.S. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said environmental regulators are losing a public relations war to
industry lobbyists.

California's Toxic Air
Scare Machine: James Enstrom, southern California native, earned a Ph.D. in elementary particle
nuclear physics at Stanford, then received postdoctoral training in epidemiology and a Masters in Public Health
from UCLA. ... In 2005, Enstrom published his results of a robust and current (50,000 people, 1973-2002) study
on the effects of small particle air pollution in California. He found no premature death effect in California
from small particle air pollution. California's air pollution of the '50s and '60s has declined for
thirty years, and Enstrom was also familiar with the improvement in air quality and the conundrum of
increasing rates of asthma that was being misrepresented by CARB.

We, The People EPA.
It's been a pattern of this administration that if the American people are adamantly opposed to it, ram it
through anyway. So it's been with the health care overhaul, offshore drilling restrictions and now the
Environmental Protection Agency threatening to become the uber-regulator of the air we breathe. The New
York Times says in a Saturday [3/13/2010] editorial regarding that last item that if Congress fails to enact
cap-and-trade legislation such as Waxman-Markey or Kerry-Boxer, the EPA should jam it down our throats.

EPA
Studying Own Carbon-Trading System, Official Says. The Obama administration is considering a
carbon-trading system under existing law if Congress doesn't pass cap-and-trade legislation that allows
companies to buy and sell the right to pollute, a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency official said today
[3/15/2010].

Obama's
EPA stifles new energy gains. [Scroll down] Last week, it was Interior Secretary Ken Salazar
announcing that no new permits will be issued for outer continental shelf development until 2014 at the earliest.
Salazar has also used bureaucratic obfuscation to delay new energy development on Western lands. There are
billions of recoverable barrels of oil and trillions of cubic feet of natural gas in those areas, enough to put
the United States well on the way to complete energy independence. Obama is instead spending billions of
tax dollars on renewable energy resources that can't possibly supply even a fourth of this nation's critical
energy needs for many decades to come.

EPA flak refuses to say if EPA will act on its own study.
Today's Examiner editorial — "Obama's EPA stifles new energy gains" — focuses on
yesterday's [3/18/2010] announcement by the agency that it has decided to spend millions of dollars on a
new multi-year study of a topic it has already studied numerous times in the past and found no dangers
to public health.

What Happens If
Congress Blocks EPA? The game EPA is playing is a classic case of bureaucratic self-dealing.
First, EPA endangers the U.S. auto industry by authorizing states to flout federal law and the Constitution.
Then, EPA proposes to avert disaster via a rulemaking that just happens to put EPA in the driver's seat
in regulating fuel economy — a power Congress never delegated to EPA when it enacted and amended
the Clean Air Act.

EPA Turns Against Utah Clean Air Plan.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency plans to deny several Utah urban areas certification under the Clean
Air Act, claiming, among other things, that the state has failed to deal adequately with natural dust storms.

The Editor says...
The people who run the EPA must be utterly insane to believe that if they outlaw dust storms, the
desert will comply.

EPA
Prepares to Regulate Oceans. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has announced it will
address so-called ocean acidification, making a deal with the Center for Biological Diversity to produce
guidance on the topic by November 15. Global warming alarmists claim marine life is being
threatened by carbon dioxide absorbed by oceans. They assert more carbon dioxide leads to increasingly
acidic water, which in turn makes it more difficult for shellfish and invertebrates to calcify their shells.

The Editor says...
The people who run the EPA must be utterly insane to believe that they can maintain the "ideal" pH for
sea water.

Mainstream Media Ignores Climategate.
[Scroll down] The Environmental Protection Agency has already threatened to regulate carbon dioxide (CO2)
and other minor atmospheric gases, none of which have anything to do with the non-existent "global warming." ... The
EPA is clinging to the lie that humans are causing climate change and continues to engage in practices that propagate
the fraud and thwart economic growth. There is no threat to public health from CO2, a gas that is vital to all
life on Earth because it is to plants what oxygen is to humans. You are not likely to read about any of this
in the MSM.

EPA Toughens Mining
Permits. The Environmental Protection Agency tightened water-quality standards that could severely
limit future surface coal-mining operations throughout Appalachia, while mining-industry officials said the
change was unfair and endangers jobs in the region. The action is a significant step in the EPA's push
under the Obama administration to limit the practice of mountaintop coal mining and its environmental effects.
For the first time, the agency is setting limits on the electrical conductivity, or salinity, of streams,
which can be impacted by such mining.

The Editor says...
Fretting about the conductivity of rivers is nothing more than quixotic busywork for the EPA. Distilled
water is the only pure, non-conductive water. All the water in all the rivers in the world is
electrically conductive because it has various minerals and contaminants dissolved and suspended in it.
And who decides what is a "stream"? Can a puddle be a "stream"?

EPA Chief Says New Pollution Rules for Cars are
Only the Beginning. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson said her
agency's inaugural regulations on greenhouse gas emissions on cars were only "the first" of such
regulations, promising that her agency would move "deliberately" to institute regulations in other
areas of the economy as well.

EPA may try to use
Clean Water Act to regulate carbon dioxide. The Environmental Protection Agency is exploring
whether to use the Clean Water Act to control greenhouse gas emissions, which are turning the oceans acidic
at a rate that's alarmed some scientists. With climate change legislation stalled in Congress, the Clean
Water Act would serve as a second front, as the Obama administration has sought to use the Clean Air Act to
rein in emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases administratively.

Environmental Extremists Making Regulatory Policies?
Although they were released on April Fools Day, new Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations covering
vehicle efficiency and water quality standards near mines are no joke. Instead, they are the inevitable
outcome when government puts environmental radicals in charge of writing regulations. These unelected
bureaucrats, headed by EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, have no regard for or understanding of property rights,
free markets, or our economy. It's all about worshiping at the altar of "climate change" and offering
penance for America's high standard of living by attacking industry in the name of "justice".

EPA Issues Strict New Auto Standards.
The Obama Administration on Thursday issued strict new environmental standards for motor vehicles, prompting
a key Republican senator to respond with a call for legislation to mitigate its impact. ... Sen. James Inhofe
(R-Okla.), ranking member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, sharply criticized the new
policy, saying it was nothing more than a "backdoor energy tax."

Backdoor Energy Tax.
From cars to coal mines, the imposition of economy-killing restrictions is under way. Are the new EPA
regulations on auto emissions the precursor to regulating carbon dioxide by executive order?

EPA's ginormous power
grab: It's a sure sign that a government agency has become overmighty when it vastly increases
its budget, grabs power unconstitutionally and treats Congress with contempt. All of this applies to the
Environmental Protection Agency. Unless Congress acts quickly to curb the EPA's power, it will become a
huge drag on the economy. Few bodies are more deserving of cutbacks now. This year, EPA's budget
(which had hovered at $7 billion to $8 billion since 1997) increased by 34 percent, to more than
$10 billion for the first time ever.

Obama's new tax on... Rainwater!?
Would President Obama's Environmental Protection Agency really force Americans to pay a tax on "rainwater
runoff" from homes and small businesses? You bet they would. In fact, the EPA, under radical
environmentalist Lisa Jackson, is proposing regulations to do just that.

The Government Greenpeace.
National unemployment rates may be high, but there's no shortage of work if you happen to be an academic type
willing to conduct Environmental Protection Agency-funded research and undertake EPA directed studies.
Last October, the EPA formally began the process of creating new stormwater management rules. We've
actually got quite the pile of stormwater management rules already...

Comcast Decision May
Thwart EPA CO2 Finding. The matters which the EPA are currently trying to resolve are potatoes
currently too hot for the Congress to handle. Accordingly, the EPA apparently plans to rely on the Clean
Water Act and ocean acidification data — as to the applicability of which there are serious
questions. ... If I read the Comcast case correctly, the rationale relied upon by the D.C. Circuit may prove
very inconvenient for the EPA and may put a damper on its attempt to circumvent Congress.

EPA
headquarters contaminated with lead. Days before the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalizes
strict new regulations for dealing with toxic lead in residential homes, the agency is quietly cleaning up a dangerous
lead contamination at its own headquarters.

Destroying America, One Environmental Law at
a Time. [Scroll down] The proposed legislation would mandate that manufacturers submit
health and safety data to the Environmental Protection Agency for 84,000 chemicals in use. The EPA has
never met a chemical it has not wanted to ban, particularly if it has a use that is beneficial to human life.
This law has no purpose beyond expanding the authority and power of the EPA, an agency which is currently
threatening to regulate carbon dioxide, one of the two gases along with oxygen on which all life on Earth
depends!

Troubled Waters. Rep.
James Oberstar wants to rewrite the Clean Water Act. If the Minnesota Democrat gets his way, the federal
government will have even greater authority to take private property. This isn't Oberstar's first attempt.
In 2007 he also tried to rewrite the water bill. He and others weren't happy with Supreme Court rulings that
defined the limits Washington has over bodies of water that have no nexus to navigable waters. They want
full federal control over all waters.

EPA Suppresses
Internal Global Warming Study. The Competitive Enterprise Institute today charged that a senior
official of the U.S. Environment Protection Agency actively suppressed a scientific analysis of climate change
because of political pressure to support the Administration's policy agenda of regulating carbon dioxide.
As part of a just-ended public comment period, CEI submitted a set of four EPA emails, dated March 12-17, 2009,
which indicate that a significant internal critique of the agency's global warming position was put under wraps
and concealed.

The EPA Monster. CO2
represents a mere 386 parts per million of the Earth's atmosphere. Humans are responsible for 3% of its
generation; Mother Nature produces the other 97%. And the EPA wants to regulate ALL of it! Actual
science is of no importance to the EPA. ... The EPA is actually seeking to limit the amount of deicing fluid used
to protect commercial and other aircraft on the grounds that it might get into nearby streams and rivers.
Never mind the lives of the passengers and crews on planes that would be brought down as the result of such ice.
This defies common sense. In truth, the EPA threatens the economy and our lives in so many ways it is
difficult to know where to point first.

EPA's New CO2 Rules: Bad News For Blacks.
The Environmental Protection Agency wants to curtail greenhouse gases. Black Americans should be
afraid. Very afraid. Five civil rights organizations recently condemned EPA's plans to regulate
carbon dioxide and other emissions as part of its war on so-called "global warming." These groups' leaders
argue that the EPA's December 7 "Endangerment Finding" and pending anti-CO2 regulations will slam Americans
hard and blacks and other minorities hardest.

Obama Abandons Climate Bill in Congress, will
have EPA Regulate CO2 Instead. The recent announcement of the Democrat's switch of focus from
Cap and Trade energy legislation to immigration reform is simply an administrative slight of hand. Barack
Obama and the rest of his co-conspirators in Washington including Rahm Emanuel, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid
know full well that a hard fought political battle in Congress over an energy bill was unnecessary.
Instead they have given the EPA their blessing to unilaterally determine CO2 limits for the nation.

Can the EPA Rely on UN Science?
When did America risk coming to be ruled by foreign scientists and apparatchiks at the United Nations? The
answer, it would seem, is ever since Lisa Jackson, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
under President Obama, chose to issue a rule determining that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases endanger
the public health and welfare.

EPA
Offers Cash for Propaganda. The Environmental Protection Agency is offering thousands of taxpayer dollars and
free publicity to whoever produces the most compelling pro-government-regulation propaganda, it announced on its website and
in a YouTube video. "Almost every aspect of our lives is touched by federal regulations," the contest announcement
correctly points out.

EPA's
Florida Water Rules will Destroy Jobs, Cost Billions, State Study Finds. The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's proposed restrictions on the application of phosphorous and nitrogen in the state of
Florida could destroy more than 14,000 Florida jobs, cost up to $3 billion dollars to implement, and cost
approximately $1 billion per year in recurring annual costs, the Florida Department of Agriculture and
Consumer Services reports.

Sensenbrenner
Report Challenges EPA Greenhouse Finding. This morning [5/6/2010], Rep. James Sensenbrenner
(R-WI), ranking member of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, will release a staff
report on the scientific issues that tend to discredit the EPA's endangerment finding for carbon dioxide as a
pollutant.

The EPA's RRP Rule isn't About Safety.
On April 22, 2010 an EPA regulation governing renovation, repair, and painting (RRP) took effect. The regulation governs any activity that
will disturb paint containing lead and applies to all homes built before 1978 and "child-occupied facilities". [...] But combating lead poisoning
is not a proper function of government. And RRP is going to do little, if anything, to combat it. It will however, grant the government
greater control over the lives of contractors and cost consumers a lot of money.

Good Cop, Bad Cop.
If Congress can't pass climate-change legislation, the EPA will force it on the country anyway.

EPA's New Unconstitutional Power Grab.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) yesterday [5/13/2010] announced a new "tailoring rule" to attempt to postpone the
disastrous consequences of their earlier "endangerment finding" that declared carbon dioxide, the substance humans
exhale, a danger to life as we know it on the planet. The endangerment finding issued last December was
designed to side-step authorization from Congress for the administration's draconian greenhouse gas permitting
regulation scheme using the Clean Air Act (CAA) as a means to regulate carbon.

States divide
over new EPA rules. While Congress wrestles yet again with climate change legislation promoted
as an energy bill, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is charging forward with draconian regulations
designed to punish key sectors of our struggling economy while yielding little or nothing in the way of actual
environmental improvement. ... Neither the EPA nor the Obama administration ever thought it would come to
this. The stringent EPA regulations proposed — and now being enacted — were supposed
to drive lawmakers to choose a cap-and-trade or tax legislation alternative to preempt the regulations.
Legislation has stalled. The EPA regulations have not.

The
Atrazine Scare Is Just the Beginning. Recently, I reported here on the environmentalists'
trumped-up scare campaign targeting atrazine, a valuable, widely used agricultural herbicide. I quoted a
Wall Street Journal editorial that observed, "The environmental lobby also figures that if it can take down
atrazine with its long record of clean health, it can get the EPA to prohibit anything." In fact, the
attack on atrazine is just part of the total war against man-made chemicals that is waged today by
environmentalists inside and outside of government.

A
Legislative Trojan Horse. The basis of the EPA's regulatory efforts is the agency's
finding that carbon dioxide is a "pollutant" that supposedly "endangers" us by causing global warming.
Once the EPA made this unprecedented and unsupported endangerment finding under the Clean Air Act, it put the
enormous regulatory machinery of the federal government in gear to generate rules regulating CO2, rules that
will damage every aspect of the U.S. economy. Thankfully, substantive legal challenges to the
endangerment finding and the rules the EPA is generating have been filed.

Avoiding the slick spots. The
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is a perplexing beast. While the agency remains hellbent on
regulating colorless, odorless and likely harmless greenhouse gas emissions, it has been utterly incapable of
living up to its name with respect to the Gulf oil spill. Not only was the EPA caught entirely
unprepared for the oil spill, but also last week it actually tried to interfere with BP's efforts to use a
chemical called Corexit to speed up dispersal of the oil. When the EPA told BP that it should use a less
toxic chemical, BP rightly ignored the order because it's the oil, not the dispersant (stupid) that is the
real threat to the environment, and there is no better option than the detergentlike Corexit.

The Editor says...
How does the EPA presume to have the authority to tell BP what to do in international waters?

The
EPA's Blueprint for Disaster. Opponents of massive new energy taxes and regulations breathed
a small sigh of relief [in June 2008] when the Lieberman-Warner climate-tax bill went down in flames on the
Senate floor. Even 10 Democrats broke from the party line and voted against it, writing that they would
have opposed the bill on final passage. Unfortunately, power-mad bureaucrats at the Environmental
Protection Agency remain undaunted. The EPA is expected today to release a document that blueprints
a dizzying array of greenhouse-gas regulatory programs under dozens of different provisions of the 1970
Clean Air Act.

Time
to Fight Back Against the EPA's Power Grab. President Obama has been very made clear
that his top domestic priorities are health care and global warming. We all know what happened on
health care. Now the date is set for the key Senate showdown on global warming: June 10.
That's when the Senate will vote on a resolution introduced by Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski
(S.J. Res. 26) that would overturn the EPA's global warming regulations. It's not
subject to filibuster. There is no place for weak-kneed senators to hide. In just two
weeks we'll know where every member of the Senate stands.

Senate to vote on Obama's
power grab. You may recall "ClimateGate" from last year and the series of "-gates" befalling
the UN's big-government project, the IPCC. EPA outsourced its scientific assessment responsibilities in this
matter, to principally rely instead on the work of the two disgraced bodies caught sexing up their claims of
unfolding climate catastrophe. When caught out, EPA silenced their internal whistleblower. The
Senate is not voting on science, however. The Murkowski resolution merely overturns the legal force and
effect of EPA's claim that carbon dioxide endangers human health and the environment (really). Congress
has serially rejected that proposition.

Stopping
The EPA's Power Grab. When cap-and-tax legislation was introduced in Congress, the Obama
administration threatened that if Congress failed to act, the EPA would, using its authority under the
Clean Air Act. The Supreme Court has said the EPA has the power, even the obligation, to impose
draconian restrictions on so-called greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide. Then last week, the
Senate took up Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski's EPA Resolution of Disapproval. It would block the EPA's plan
to impose a national cap-and-trade scheme through regulation and not legislation.

The EPA Runs Amuck. The current
administrator of the EPA is Lisa Jackson who learned her trade working under [Carol] Browner until she was
picked to head the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. A Browner acolyte, Jackson has
presided over an EPA run amuck. Jackson will be remembered for leading the EPA fight to get carbon
dioxide declared a "pollutant" that can then be regulated under the Clean Air Act. This is the same
reasoning put forth by the constantly renamed Cap-and-Trade Act that is was a "climate" bill and has now
become something else.

EPA
classifies milk as oil, forcing costly rules on farmers. Having watched the oil gushing in the
Gulf of Mexico, dairy farmer Frank Konkel has a hard time seeing how spilled milk can be labeled the same
kind of environmental hazard. But the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is classifying milk as oil
because it contains a percentage of animal fat, which is a non-petroleum oil.

'What Would
Saul Alinsky Do?' Defying court orders is just one of many ways Obama abuses his authority.
When Congress failed with its initial efforts to impose cap-and-tax legislation designed to suppress traditional
energy production and consumption in the United States for the ostensible purpose of reducing global temperature
an imperceptible amount over the next century, Obama's Environmental Protection Agency just issued ultra vires
regulations to accomplish similar results. It didn't matter that every literate and intellectually honest
person had to concede that the EPA had no statutory (or any other) authority to issue such sweeping
regulations. What mattered were the administration's radical environmental goals.

EPA
and Texas Clash Over Air Quality Permits. The simmering conflict between the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and Texas officials over air quality requirements has reached the boiling point with
EPA seizing control of a key permit governing the Lone Star State's fifth-largest refinery. In what
could lead to further escalation of the row, a high-level EPA official has threatened to strip Texas of its
power to issue such permits, unless the government in Austin bows to Washington's regulatory demands.

EPA
rejects Texas program that reduced emissions, increased productivity. Why is it one question
keeps recurring whenever EPA announces a decision: What is wrong with these people? The latest
such example concerns the agency's rejection of a Texas air quality program that slashed emissions in the
Lone Star state while encouraging increased workplace productivity.

A Hapless Administration.
[Scroll down] Although it cannot create jobs, government can retard job creation. An EPA ban
on mountaintop mining will wipe out thousands of jobs in Appalachia, according to the National Mining Association.
The ban on deepwater drilling — which promises to extend beyond six months since the advisory committee
to evaluation drilling safety has not even met — will cost 20,000 jobs. Financial regulation
promises to drive tens of thousands of Wall Street jobs overseas to free-market havens like Singapore, Hong Kong,
and Switzerland. Pending cap and trade legislation will further sap growth and reduce competitiveness,
leading to further job losses.

To EPA, Milk is
'Toxic Sludge'. The EPA program in question falls under the Clean Water Act and requires owners
of large oil storage tanks to develop plans to prevent and handle any spills. Milk contains a certain
percentage of animal fat, which is considered a non-petroleum oil, and therefore bulk milk storage tanks near
waterways could be subject to the regulations.

The Editor says...
Obviously, if this is what they're concerned about, the EPA has run out of things to do.

The Prophet of the Ruling
Class. So now the EPA has been petitioned to ban the use of lead in bullets and fishing weights.
For hundreds of years, human beings have used lead for those purposes, and life on earth has not exactly come to
an end. Now we are told that the lead used in hunting and fishing is harming animals and fish, and it
must stop. The scary thing is that one individual, EPA Director Lisa Jackson, has the power to impose
such a ban.

Shouldn't the EPA be working on actual problems... like this?Governing against the
People. While it is not yet known whether "the rise of the oceans began to slow" since the
nomination/election of Barack Obama, it is clear that Lake Michigan hasn't, thanks to the recent infusion of
more than two billion gallons of raw sewage, courtesy of the City of Milwaukee. This is a not-uncommon
occurrence due to the fact that the city's storm and sanitary sewers are one and the same and, despite a massively
expensive "Deep Tunnel" reservoir, a heavy deluge not only impacts the lake, but causes a backflow into
thousands of local homes.

I
pledge allegiance — to the EPA? Once again, the Obama Administration has shown its
propensity for heavy-handed regulation rather than bipartisan, or even congressional, support. And once
again — just like with health care reform — states are rebelling and lawsuits are
looming. This time, the issue is greenhouse gases.

9th
Circuit: Mud from logging roads is pollution. A federal appeals court has decided that
mud washing off logging roads is pollution and ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to write regulations
to reduce the amount that reaches salmon streams.

Texas
fights global-warming power grab. President Obama's EPA is already well down the path to
regulating greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, something the act was not designed to do.
It has a problem, however, because shoehorning greenhouse gases into that 40-year-old law would force
churches, schools, warehouses, commercial kitchens and other sources to obtain costly and time-consuming
permits. It would grind the economy to a halt, and the likely backlash would doom the whole scheme.

EPA's
Gun Control. The U.S. Supreme Court says Americans have an individual right to keep and bear
arms. The EPA says the bullets for those guns may be banned as an environmental hazard.

Environmental Protection
Agency Reviewing Petition to Ban Lead Bullets. Will Environmental Protection Agency Administrator
Lisa Jackson make a back door move to ban lead bullets the day before the November 2 elections?
Several environmentalist groups led by the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) are petitioning the EPA to
ban lead bullets and shot (as well as lead sinkers for fishing) under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).

EPA Now Accepting Public Comment on Petition to Ban Lead
in Ammunition. Environmental activists are pressing the Obama administration to ban the manufacture,
processing and distribution lead shot, bullets, and fishing sinkers under the Toxic Substances Control Act of
1976, but hunting and Second Amendment groups say the EPA lacks the authority to do so, for starters.

Gun owners dodge
the bullet ban. On Aug. 3, the American Bird Conservancy and groups like Public Employees
for Environmental Responsibility petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency to ban traditional lead
ammunition as a "health risk." Obviously, the argument was not that recipients of a 45-caliber slug
might suffer from lead poisoning. Instead, these activists asserted that bullets weighing less than
half an ounce might hit the ground and somehow poison the planet. It just isn't true. The Clinton
administration's EPA looked into the issue and found no cause for concern. The claim that "lead based
ammunition is hazardous is in error," EPA senior science adviser William Marcus wrote in a Dec. 25, 1999,
letter.

Earth Day and Environmental
Insanity: Anyone who has been paying any attention to the environmental movement has got to have
concluded it is insane. ... In America, there has been a resurgence of bed bugs, formerly controlled by DDT.
The EPA recently awarded $550,000 in grants to the University of Missouri, Texas A&M University, the Maryland
Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Rutgers University, and the Michigan Department of Community Health,
for bed bug "education, outreach, and environmental justice departments." So, instead of authorizing
the use of a pesticide to rid us all of bed bugs, it wants to "educate" us to live with them. That's
insane.

Is
the EPA to blame for the bed bug 'epidemic'? Eradication [of bed bugs] can take months and cost
thousands of dollars. There's also the stigma -- many high-end New York residences, for instance, keep
their bed bug infestations secret to avoid embarrassment. But why are bed bugs back? Though they've
been sucking humans' blood since at least ancient Greece, bed bugs became virtually extinct in America
following the invention of pesticide DDT. There were almost no bed bugs in the United States
between World War II and the mid-1990s.

US Grapples With
Bedbugs as EPA Limits Options. A resurgence of bedbugs across the U.S. has homeowners and
apartment dwellers taking desperate measures to eradicate the tenacious bloodsuckers, with some relying on
dangerous outdoor pesticides and fly-by-night exterminators.

America Goes Buggy Over Bed Bugs.
[Scroll down] So let me say that I have the ANSWER to the nation's plague of bed bugs. It's called
PESTICIDES. Not just any pesticides, but specifically the ones that the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency has successfully banned or forced pesticide manufacturers to stop registering or manufacturing because
of the cost involved. The truth you will never read elsewhere is that there are pesticides that will rid
the nation of this massive bed bug population explosion and they will do so rapidly. Can you imagine an
end to the current bed bug infestations just about everywhere in say, a month?

Obama
Urges Court to Vacate AGW Decision. Just as the administration used the endangerment rule to try
and spook Congress and industry into supporting cap and trade, it is now using CO2 tort litigation to try and
spook them into supporting — or at least not aggressively attacking — EPA regulation of
greenhouse gases via the Clean Air Act.

The environmental
movement in retreat. [Scroll down] The essence of progressivism, of which environmentalism
has become an appendage, is the faith that all will be well once we have concentrated enough power in Washington
and have concentrated enough Washington power in the executive branch and have concentrated enough "experts"
in that branch. Hence the Environmental Protection Agency proposes to do what the elected representatives
of the rubes refuse to do in limiting greenhouse gases.

Appalachian
Coal Miners Say EPA Rules Are Killing Their Jobs. Since last year, The Environmental Protection Agency
has stepped up regulation on mountaintop coal mining across six Appalachian states because the explosives that are
used to remove mountain surfaces send debris into rivers and streams, endangering the environment. But
with the stricter rules in place, the industry, which is considered the lifeblood of Appalachian towns, argues
it's under attack. Workers and advocacy groups that represent them say the rules unfairly target their
region and require mining firms to meet unrealistic standards.

Texas
Sues to Block Bizarre "Global Warming" EPA Rules. The state of Texas today [9/16/2010] sued the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency in a federal appeals court in Washington DC, claiming four new regulations imposed by the EPA
are based on the 'thoroughly discredited' findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and
are 'factually flawed,' [WOAI] reports.

Inhofe
Says EPA's New Boiler Rule Could Kill Nearly 800,000 Manufacturing Jobs. The top Republican on a
Senate environmental panel released a scathing report Tuesday [9/28/2010] that he contends shows that the
Environmental Protection Agency's new proposed rule on cleaning up boilers nationwide could devastate America's
manufacturing base and imperil hundreds of thousands of jobs without providing any real public health or
environmental benefits.

Proposed EPA Rules
on Lead Paint. The EPA has new rules on lead paint abatement when renovating, repairing, or
repainting residential rental property. As a quick look will reveal, it is lengthy and complicated, with
many links. It is obvious that it is a bureaucratic nightmare for an elderly person with one rental unit.
The contractors who are certified will have to charge outrageous prices in order to comply with these rules.

A
human balance needed for the environment. Everybody wants clean air and water. Everybody
wants to conserve America's abundant natural resources. ... But who wants to turn one of the world's most
fertile farming regions, an area that long fed millions of Americans and provided jobs for countless workers,
into an arid wasteland, all on behalf of a small fish?

Obamachine
pulls the plug on appliances. Regulation-weary Americans had better brace themselves for another
load of government-knows-best activism as President Obama's green czarina claims she has a mandate to pick what
household appliances we can use in the future. Cathy Zoi, assistant energy secretary for energy efficiency
and renewable energy, recently outlined the administration's so-called clean-energy strategy, under which new
government standards will force market transformation for products such as small electric motors, water heaters,
pool heaters, space heaters and commercial clothes washers.

Where EPA Is Public Enemy #1.
[Scroll down] Farmers, ranchers, and foresters "are increasingly frustrated and bewildered by vague,
overreaching, and unnecessarily burdensome EPA regulations," a U.S. senator charged last week. They "are
facing at least a dozen new regulatory requirements, each of which will add to their costs, making it harder
for them to compete. ... [M]ost if not all of these regulations rely on dubious rationales."

Environmental Protection Agency rules could
hurt Barack Obama in 2012. Political battlegrounds like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia that
Obama won in 2008 will be watching how the EPA moves on climate change. Coal-reliant states such as
Indiana and Missouri — which Obama lost by less than 1 percentage point — will be
monitoring clean air rules and coal ash standards. And farm states that Obama carried, including Iowa,
Minnesota and Wisconsin, are waiting on a proposal to tighten air quality limits for microscopic soot.

The
Green Agenda. In keeping with President Obama's promise to slow the rise of the oceans and heal
the planet, the Energy Department has set new efficiency standards for 26 appliances and household products.
The list ranges from microwaves, to washing machines and dryers, to residential water heaters and dishwashers.
The department reportedly claims the new standards will save consumers from $250 billion to $300 billion
on their energy costs through 2030. But that's what Democrats always say about their green schemes:
"We're doing this to clean up the Earth, and we're going to save you money while we do it." Don't
believe it.

The EPA's Long War on Chemicals.
All manner of things we use to enhance our lives start out as raw materials and the process of manufacture is
a miracle of transformation. Virtually all forms of manufacturing require some chemical element, often
several. Given the indispensability of chemicals in society and commerce, does it strike anyone as odd
that, if you were born after 1960, there's a high likelihood that you grew up being told that "chemicals" are
bad?

Hey EPA: Don't Mess with Texas.
After declaring greenhouse gases hazardous earlier this year, the EPA plans to use the Clean Air Act to begin
regulating greenhouse gas emissions from emitters of all sizes beginning January 2011. The EPA's plan has
been widely criticized for being too burdensome and expensive, so the EPA attempted to downsize the plan with a
"Tailoring Rule," targeting only the largest emitters. In August, Texas filed a lawsuit against the EPA,
declaring the proposed "Tailoring Rule" illegal. The state rightly claims the EPA's plan is unlawful
because the Clean Air Act does not address greenhouse gases, even after its last revision by Congress in 1990.

Restrictions Would
Reduce Global Temperature by No More Than 0.006° in 90 Years. Tough new rules proposed by
the Environmental Protection Agency restricting greenhouse gas emissions would reduce the global mean temperature
by only 0.006 to 0.0015 of a degree Celsius by the year 2100, according to the EPA's analysis. As a side
effect, these rules would "slow construction nationwide for years," the EPA said in a June 3 statement.

How
Obama is invading your home. The Obama administration isn't satisfied giving the American public
vast things we don't want — from stimulus packages to bailouts to ObamaCare: It's a small-scale
nuisance, too — witness its attempt to redesign home appliances. In the pipeline are dumb
regulations for almost everything that plugs in or fires up in your home.

Obama's
Job-Killing Regulations. [Scroll down] In another move that compounds the regulatory burdens,
the EPA recently issued a strategic plan for the next five years (Fiscal Year 2011-2015 EPA Strategic Plan) that
will cost over a trillion dollars to implement. The plan advances retaliatory mandates that allow President
Obama to punish organizations that oppose his flawed policies and donate heavily to Republicans. For example,
on page 44, the EPA unveils its new plan to criminalize violations of the agency's mandates and has targeted
four industries — cement plants, coal-fired utilities, glass plants and animal feeding operations — all
industries that have, traditionally, donated heavily to Republicans.

More Ethanol to Be
Allowed in Cars. The Obama administration plans to allow higher levels of ethanol for gasoline
used by newer cars, a step that would benefit corn growers but which has been strongly opposed by auto makers,
livestock ranchers, oil refiners and some public-health advocates. As early as Wednesday [10/13/2010],
the Environmental Protection Agency plans to announce it will allow ethanol levels in gasoline blends to be
as high as 15% for vehicles made since 2007, up from 10% currently, according to two people familiar with
the matter.

Exxon
attacks EPA ethanol decision. ExxonMobil Corp. isn't happy with the Environmental Protection
Agency over its decision this week to allow increased levels of ethanol in gasoline for newer cars.
Refiners have long opposed policies that mandate or encourage increased blending of ethanol into gasoline.

Mr. Obama,
tell the EPA to change the Tailoring Rule. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is preparing
to implement greenhouse gas emissions regulations in January 2011, which will hit many sectors of our economy.
After receiving widespread (and correct) criticism that they would burden far too many aspects of the economy with
expensive and cumbersome regulations, the EPA "tailored" its rule in an effort to target only the biggest emitters.
However, the Tailoring Rule is just as burdensome as the original regulations and will not only impact jobs
and the economy, but will also impact an important source of renewable energy that our country needs.

The Slow Death of the Environmental Movement.
Today there are so many environmental organizations and groups that you need a directory to sort them out.
These groups, however, are now far more political than their original intent. They are ministries of
misinformation, disinformation, and outright scare mongering. The movement as we know it today got a
boost with the publication in 1962 of Rachel Carson's book, "Silent Spring." It was an anti-pesticide
diatribe whose claims have long since been disproved, but it set in motion a tsunami of fears regarding all
chemicals and, beyond that, concerns about all kinds of manufacturing and technology; indeed anything involving
energy resources. Within eight years of the book's publication President Nixon initiated the Environmental
Protection Agency that has since metatisized into a rogue government agency intent on controlling all aspects
of life in America.

The
EPA's Anti-Prosperity Agenda. On Labor Day, President Obama pledged to "keep fighting every single
day, every single hour, every single minute to turn this economy around and put people back to work." If job
creation is such an overarching priority, the president might take a closer look at the recent barrage of job-suffocating
actions from his Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The president might also look at Texas, where job creation
and environmental improvement have occurred simultaneously and at a pace far above the national average.

EPA
now funding propaganda videos telling kids juiceboxes are destroying the planet. [Scroll
down] According to the [New York] Times, Young Rafael's class had just watched The Story of
Stuff, an animated anti-capitalist diatribe by former Greenpeace employee Annie Leonard. The program,
which was financed in part by left-wing Tides Foundation, is big hit among among school teachers looking to
beef up their schools' environmental curricula. Leonard claims her video has been viewed by over
three million people online, and some 7,000 copies of the DVD have been sold. Another environmental
group, Facing the Future, is working developing curricula designed around the program for schools in
all 50 states.

Wind power mirages. We
Americans are often told we must end our "addiction" to oil and coal, because they harm the environment and
Earth's climate. "Ecologically friendly" wind energy, some say, will generate 20% of America's energy
in another decade, greatly reducing carbon dioxide emissions and land use impacts from mining and drilling.
These claims are a driving force behind the cap-tax-and-trade and renewable energy bills that Congress may try
to ram through during a "lame duck" session — as well as the Environmental Protection Agency's
economy-threatening regulations under its ruling that carbon dioxide "endangers human health and welfare."

Texas
ignoring new greenhouse gas rules. Houston Texas has refused to meet new federal greenhouse gas
emission rules that go into effect in January, the latest anti-Washington move in an ongoing battle that could
halt new construction at the nation's largest refineries and other industry in Texas.

What
EPA really stands for: "Employment Prevention Agency". Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels just might be
the Calvin Coolidge of the 21st Century. Check out this CNBC interview in which he explains why the
country needs an emergency economic growth package now, and why that should start with President Obama
instructing executive branch agencies to cool it with the new regulations.

The
EPA's Odd View of 'Consumer Choice'. Earlier this month, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed
in a "Notice of Intent" that passenger vehicle fuel economy average as much as 62 miles per gallon 14 years
from now. The agency was able to arrive at this lofty mark by conveniently ignoring everything we know about
the state of automotive art and the marketplace today. ... To bolster its 62-mpg proposal, EPA produced a numbing
245-page analysis of prospective automotive technologies — many of which don't exist, the rest of
which have been rejected by consumers.

President Lies in Press Conference.
"The EPA is under a court order that identifies greenhouse gases as a pollutant." (paraphrase) The truth
is, the court said EPA must make a determination whether they are a pollutant. Big difference.

Re: President Lies in Press
Conference. This is unavoidably true, unless he does not know what he is talking about.
Neither is good news given the staggering consequences to flow from EPA's discretionary action of regulating
carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act, using provisions never intended for such purpose. Which is to
say, he is flat and tragically wrong, no matter how forcefully he insists it is so.
It isn't.

Skinning
The Carbon Cat With EPA. It's been said that a socialist thrown out the window will come back through
the front door as an environmentalist. This reminds us of something we noticed in the president's day-after
concession speech. Though acknowledging the cap-and-trade law is no longer a legislative priority, Obama
also said he's not giving up on the idea of restricting Americans' output of carbon dioxide.

Obama Doesn't Rule Out
Using EPA Regulations to Cap Carbon Emissions. In a White House press conference Wednesday, President
Barack Obama did not rule out using regulations issued by the Environmental Protection Agency to cap carbon emissions
in the United States without an act of Congress. Meanwhile, on October 25, the EPA announced new regulations
to limit "greenhouse gas" emissions by heavy-duty trucks and buses.

Report: EPA
draws up strict new smog regulations. The Environmental Protection Agency has asked the U.S. government
to enact strict new smog regulations for ground-level ozone that the agency says negatively effects the health of millions
of Americans. The request to cut ground-level ozone levels to .006 to .007 parts per million comes less than two
years after the Bush administration set standards of .0075 particles of pollutants per one million. That doesn't
sound like a very big change, but the New York Times reports that the agency quotes the price tag of such a change at
between $19 billion and $100 billion per year by 2020.

Job-Killing Environmentalists.
What's happened is that Obama has given the environmental extremists the power to make some of their wish list come true.
Modern measurement techniques allow scientists to measure tiny parts per million; much of the technology did not exist when the
Clean Air Act was first legislated in 1990. Using these new techniques environmentalists are able to impose their
fantasies upon American business and labor. For industry, removing the last parts per million is prohibitively costly.
For instance, technology which could have removed the Gulf of Mexico oil spill was prohibited by the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) because the discharged ocean water would still contain more than 15 parts per million of oil.

Oil,
grocery groups sue EPA over ethanol decision. The Grocery Manufacturers Association, the American
Petroleum Institute and other groups filed a lawsuit challenging the EPA's decision to allow more corn-based
ethanol in gasoline. Lobbying organizations representing companies that include Tyson Foods Inc. and
Coca-Cola Co. are part of the lawsuit filed today in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit.

The Rise of Unchecked
Presidential Power. [Scroll down] The legislative branch, for example, has ceded vast
parts of its authority voluntarily. According the to the Constitution, only the legislature can make
laws. Although not the first example of such an agency, the creation of the Environmental Protection
Agency in 1970 is a good example. The EPA was founded by an act of the legislature and charged to
protect the environment. Since then, the EPA has been writing "regulations" which are, in fact, laws.
You can be prosecuted and deprived of freedom or assets for disobeying the regulations of the EPA.
Instead of going through all the trouble itself, Congress has delegated the passing of environmental
laws to an agency not beholden to the will of the voting public.

How EPA
Could Destroy 7.3 Million Jobs. Here we are, with 15 million Americans unemployed and
millions more underemployed, and the EPA is moving blindly ahead with new regulations that will increase
dramatically the energy costs of U.S. industries, reducing their competitiveness and profitability, and
making it less likely they will hire. EPA's action amounts to rewriting the Clean Air Act to suit its
own bureaucratic and ideological objectives. At a time when the Obama administration should be focused
on job creation and the nation's economic recovery, promulgating stringent new environmental rules should
be its last priority.

EPA at 40 — An Agency Out of
Control. Today [12/2/2010] is the Environmental Protection Agency's 40th birthday. Thank
you Richard Nixon: you left us a heck of a legacy on this one. The media is sure to tout the remarkable
environmental progress in the United States over the past 40 years, and indeed we have never had cleaner air,
cleaner water, or more plentiful wildlife. By any objective measure, environmental progress has been remarkable
over the past 40 years, but it was also remarkable for decades before the creation of the EPA, and indeed every
advanced economy has seen dramatic environmental improvement, regardless of its regulatory model.

EPA Shifting Its Emphasis
to 'Sustainability'. The Environmental Protection Agency, marking its 40th anniversary this week,
announced that "sustainability concepts" will govern its programs from now on. EPA Administrator Lisa P.
Jackson said her agency has commissioned a "groundbreaking" National Research Council study that will help the
agency "incorporate sustainability into the way the agency approaches environmental protection."

The EPA: 40 and
past its prime. EPA and the "environmentalists" to whom it continually panders regularly muddle
the public with specious warnings about impending risk. One such alarm concerns the presence of trace
amounts of certain chemicals that are present in our bodies. Activists perform "studies" that search
for trace amounts of a variety of chemicals in blood or tissues — and find them. But given
the sophistication and sensitivity of our modern analytical techniques, we can find infinitesimal amounts of
almost anything we look for. The mere presence of a synthetic chemical — even one known to
be toxic at high levels — does not make it a health concern.

EPA's Smoke-and-Mirrors on Smog and Soot.
This article begins a series examining the science behind the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's proposed
proposed tighten air quality standards for ground-level ozone (O3 or smog) and fine particulate matter
(PM2.5 or soot).

EPA Again Delays
Tighter Ozone Restrictions. The Obama administration is delaying a decision on whether to
tighten limits on ground-level ozone, the third time in less than a year that it has put off the potentially
costly environmental rule in the face of congressional and industry pressure. The Environmental
Protection Agency announced Wednesday [12/8/2010] that it won't be prepared to decide until next July
whether to tighten a national air-quality standard for ozone.

The EPA Versus the USA.
First, there was no "global warming"; only the normal and natural warming that had been in effect since around
1850 when a 500-year "little ice age" ended in the northern hemisphere. Second, the Earth is now in a
normal and natural cooling cycle, though with the added concern that it is also at the end of an 11,500 year
interglacial cycle between the last major ice age and the next. Third, the data put forth by the UN
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has been almost entirely discredited, based as it was on rigged
research by corrupted university centers and governmental agencies.

Can a State
Bypass the EPA? In 2010, the EPA granted exactly two new coal mining permits in West Virginia.
There are fifty outstanding permits, because according to the EPA, bugs are more important than jobs.
Mayfly populations are disrupted when coal companies dig beneath the surface of the earth, which the EPA says
affects the amount of food and thus the populations of indigenous fish. Other research has indicated that
as soon as those bugs leave, other ones take their place, and fish populations are unaffected. As the
result of this standoff, coal cannot expand in Appalachia, and some of the highest paying jobs in the state
remain unfilled.

The Epa Risk-Inverter. It has often been noted
that in searching for "safety," the EPA magnifies risks to individuals. Its so-called conservative
assumption is the One Molecule Hypothesis. This states that a single molecule of a carcinogen is capable
of inducing a cancer and that there is no "threshold," no concentration of a carcinogen that can be considered
safe. The dose-response curve for compounds that are carcinogenic to rats in near-lethal doses, or
carcinogenic to humans in industrial exposures, are extrapolated to the (0,0) origin. (This assumption
is not made for compounds that are merely poisonous rather than carcinogenic; for toxic effects, its falsity
is obvious.)

EPA
Not Serving Health, the Public. During the week of Nov. 15, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency proposed new air quality regulations intended to reduce carbon emissions among many of
America's industries and activities. We can argue about the need to better our air quality beyond the
amazing improvements we have witnessed the past 30 years. We can argue about the need to reduce
carbon emissions when carbon dioxide is the life blood of our planet supporting the plant life that makes
life for mankind viable.

EPA: For 'When Congress Resists
Action'. Surely you remember this dynamic from civics class, or even some more advanced inquiry
into our system: Congress only decides major domestic policy issues until unelected bureaucrats and
political appointees decide they can no longer wait for our elected representatives. Like (as the article
also notes) the Department of Interior is for locking up land when Congress resists doing so, the FCC is for
when Congress resists action on the Progressives' view of the internet, and so on through the alphabet soup of
government.

Automakers
Sue EPA Over E15 Fuel Blend. A coalition of automakers is suing President Obama's Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), hoping to overturn that agency's decision to allow the sale of E15, a blend of
15 percent ethanol added to gasoline, for cars and light trucks manufactured since 2007. The
Engine Products Group (EPG) filed suit on Monday [12/20/2010] with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit.

Messing With Texas:
The federal agency declares Texas unfit to regulate its own greenhouse gas emissions and seizes control of the
permitting process. Jobs, states' rights and the 2012 presidential election are all involved.

Nullification in 2011!
[Scroll down] The Department of Energy, created by executive order, should be abolished. States
should have the right to determine how their natural resources should be either protected or utilized.
Requiring states to use so-called alternative (wind and solar) energy is seriously wrong. Likewise, the
Environmental Protection Agency, also created by executive order, has so exceeded its original mandate that it
has become a lethal threat to the economy and the welfare of all Americans. Nullification should be
utilized to rid us of these and other federal entities that overstep their mission, threatening the Bill of
Rights and other constitutional limitations and freedoms.

Texas, EPA
Fight Over Regulations Grows Fierce. A longstanding tit-for-tat between Texas and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency over how to regulate pollution has grown fierce in recent months, leaving
industry frustrated and allowing some plants and refineries to spew more toxic waste into the air, streams
and lakes than what is federally acceptable.

EPA Rules
Will Trump Your Rights. Ignoring both Congress and the voters, the Environmental Protection Agency starts the new year
governing by decree with job-killing regulations. Take a deep breath, but if you exhale you're a polluter.

The
EPA's End-Run Around Democracy. In a recent issue of the Daily Caller, reporter Jonathan Strong
asserts that EPA's global warming regulations are "no end-run around Congress," because "This time Congress
is being held hostage by its own laws." That's exactly what EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and just
about every environmental advocacy group in America says. They are mistaken. Interestingly, much
of Strong's argument leads to conclusion that EPA is engaged in an end-run. His column leaves
little doubt that the Clean Air Act (CAA) is a stunningly inappropriate framework for regulating greenhouse
gases. That should make him wary of environmentalist claims that EPA is just carrying out the will of
Congress.

Arizona's
greenhouse-gas rules to be enforced by the EPA. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will
directly enforce new greenhouse-gas rules in parts of Arizona after the state refused to submit its own
program for controlling the pollutants. The new rules, which take effect today, add greenhouse gases
to the list of pollutants covered under air-quality permits and will eventually require the largest
polluters, mainly industrial operations, to reduce emissions.

Court blocks EPA plan to take over Texas
pollution permits. A federal appeals court has temporarily blocked the EPA's plan to seize control
of greenhouse gas permits from Texas. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency must wait until at least
Friday [1/7/2011] so the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia can make a decision on Texas'
bid to prevent the federal takeover.

Nearly
50 House Republicans offer bill to block EPA climate rules. Dozens of Republicans used the opening
day of the new Congress on Wednesday [1/5/2010] to introduce legislation that would bar the Environmental Protection
Agency from regulating greenhouse-gas emissions. Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), a member of the Energy and
Commerce Committee, sponsored the bill. The measure's 46 co-sponsors are all Republicans except for Rep. Dan
Boren (D-Okla.).

Media Excuse Obama's Power Grab.
Juliet Eilperin of the Washington Post reported on Friday [12/31/2010] that "the Obama administration is
prepared to push its environmental agenda through regulation where it has failed on Capitol Hill..."
There was no hint that this approach is illegal or unconstitutional. The account simply assumes that the
Obama Administration can do what it wants, no matter what Congress or the law says. This kind of
matter-of-fact reporting about lawlessness by the federal government is typical of the decline, if not
death, of adversary journalism in the nation's capital.

A
nation choking on endless laws. First, the federal Environmental Protection Agency, under Lisa Jackson,
has decided that its mandate now includes the very air we exhale — carbon dioxide — and is
introducing stringent standards to help fight such "pollutants" and so-called greenhouse gases. Never
mind that the "science" is far from settled, that the Climategate e-mails showed active collusion among
researchers to misrepresent the facts about alleged "global warming," that some of the 1,700 British scientists
who signed a declaration defending the researchers' professional integrity have said they felt pressured into
doing it (or didn't work on "climate change" at all) and that Al Gore is a...

GOP All Set To Wimp Out On EPA? Now
that we face the prospect of flagrantly illegal, arbitrary, expensive and pointless regulation of greenhouse
gases by the EPA, I was eager to read how the new Congress was going to, say, slash the EPA's budget to prevent
it from implementing the climate rules or perhaps shut down the federal government if the Obama administration
proceeded with its plan to dictate energy policy in order to control the economy. Instead, [Rep. Fred]
Upton offered a mere two sentences of action that are better described as displaying pusillanimity rather
than pugnacity.

The EPA is gradually and systematically choking off all sources of domestic energy.Chairman
Issa Slams EPA Decision To Close Mine. In a preview of the type of confrontations likely this year
as the new Republican-led House gets down to business, the chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform committee,
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., said an action by the Environmental Protection Agency to effectively close down a West
Virginia coal mine was part of the "climate of uncertainty" facing businesses that was holding back the economic
recovery.

EPA Blasted as It
Revokes Mine's Permit. The Environmental Protection Agency, in an unusual move, revoked a key
permit for one of the largest proposed mountaintop-removal coal-mining projects in Appalachia, drawing cheers from
environmentalists and protests from business groups worried their projects could be next. The decision to
revoke the permit for Arch Coal Inc.'s Spruce Mine No. 1 in West Virginia's rural Logan County marks the first
time the EPA has withdrawn a water permit for a mining project that had previously been issued.

EPA Grants Itself More Powers,
Revokes Permit. Not ones to rest on their laurels, the federal appointees at the Environmental
Protection Agency have jumped into 2011 reaffirming their status as the most dangerous regulators in Washington.
In a bewildering reversal on Thursday [1/13/2011], the EPA revoked a permit it issued more than three years ago
for the Spruce No. 1 Mine, set for operation in Logan County, West Virginia. Mingo Logan, a
subsidiary of Arch Coal, originally obtained a mining permit from the EPA in 2007 in accordance with the
Clean Water Act (CWA). The Section 404 permit was issued after a decade of review and costly
analyses, whereby the project was deemed unobjectionable. Until now, that is.

Obama
Coal Crackdown Sends Message to Industry. A move by the Environmental Protection Agency to
revoke the long-standing permits for a mammoth coal mine in West Virginia sends a strong signal that
President Obama plans to implement key parts of his agenda even though newly empowered Republicans can block
his plans in Congress. In the aftermath of the November elections, many political pundits predicted
that the once-unchecked Obama legislative machine would turn it's [sic] energies to federal rulemaking as a
way to circumvent Republicans on Capitol Hill. And the EPA's decision last week suggests that those
forecasts were spot-on.

The EPA just
can't help itself. Not content with backdooring the unequivocally unpopular cap-and-trade
legislation through regulating carbon emissions, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has looked to
further cripple American energy producers, manufacturers, and businesses by blanketing the industries in
bureaucratic uncertainty. Last Thursday [1/13/2011], the EPA revoked a permit it issued more than
three years ago for the Spruce No. 1 Mine in Logan Country, West Virginia citing the Clean Water Act.

The Editor says...
That's a new one. Backdooring. "Back door" is two words, and neither one is a verb.
Sometimes it amazes me that (apparently) professional writers have such feeble vocabularies that they find it
necessary to verbize nouns. Eroding our language is almost as destructive as eroding our liberty.

Obama 2.O: The
First Big Lie. Industry groups have been criticizing Obama's Environmental Protection
Agency for many actions that have suppressed growth, including growth in the number of jobs. Most
recently, for the first time ever, the EPA pulled a permit for a new mine — after the company
developing the mine had already spent 200 million dollars on it. This just followed one action
after another by the EPA that has discouraged businesses from expanding their operations; they fear
running afoul of the latest EPA pronouncements on carbon dioxide or any other element that the EPA
wants to regulate to death. Even some Democrats (mostly from coal mining states) have had the
temerity to oppose the EPA.

When
Agencies Rule Our Lives. [Scroll down] The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that
carbon dioxide could be considered a pollutant under the Clean Air Act. So the EPA claims it must
act, but it also claims it will only target the largest companies — 13,661 of them — that
are responsible for most of the emissions. So a gas, carbon dioxide, which every living thing on
earth must have, is considered a pollutant and the EPA will eagerly embrace the very expensive effort
to reduce that gas, even as Congress refuses to pass enabling legislation. Apparently, these
agencies don't just rule citizens, they rule Congress as well.

Spilled Milk.
Despite the old saying, "Don't cry over spilled milk," the Environmental Protection Agency is doing just
that. ... The EPA has decided that, since milk contains oil, it has the authority to force farmers to comply
with new regulations to file "emergency management" plans to show how they will cope with spilled milk, how
farmers will train "first responders" and build "containment facilities" if there is a flood of spilled milk.

GOP All Set To Wimp Out On EPA?
Since the new Congress will not rubber-stamp Obama's socialist legislative agenda, the President will seek to
socialize us via regulation — regardless of legality. The EPA's climate regulation plan is
unconstitutional on its face (only Congress, not federal agencies, can change laws). Another example of
the coming socialization-by-regulation is the Federal Communications Commission's recent party-line vote to
implement net neutrality rules despite the a federal appellate court ruling that it lacks the statutory
authority to do so.

Obama administration threatens climate veto.
The Obama administration Wednesday [2/2/2011] repeated its threat to veto legislation that would curb its
ability to regulate greenhouse gases. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson said
that the White House continues to oppose any efforts from Capitol Hill to hamstring her agency on climate
change.

EPA
chief slams bills to block climate rules, affirms Obama's veto threat. Environmental Protection
Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson on Wednesday attacked bills piling up in Congress that would block the
agency's ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and reiterated the White House veto threat.
Jackson, speaking to reporters, initially declined to address whether President Obama would veto bills that
stop climate rules, but later said that past threats still stand.

EPA to set limits on
chemicals in drinking water. The Environmental Protection Agency will set a limit on the amount
of the chemical perchlorate, as well as other "toxic contaminants," in drinking water, it announced Wednesday
[2/2/2011]. ... Perchlorate is both a naturally occurring and man-made chemical, according to the EPA.
It is used in fireworks, road flares, rocket fuel and may be present in bleach and some fertilizers, the
agency said.

The Editor asks...
Contaminants in what quantity? Even rain water has "contaminants" if you look closely enough.
That's the thing about the EPA: They find "contaminants" and "pollutants" everywhere because they are looking for
insignificant quantities and meaninglessly small percentages. Our environment will never be clean enough
to satisfy the EPA.

EPA's desperate new smog scare:
A new study reports that people can suffer lung damage from ground-level ozone (smog) even at the strict new
standards proposed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. But this is yet another example of how
science can be manufactured by EPA to fit its regulatory agenda. ... Although the Bush administration EPA had
tightened the ozone standard to 75 parts per billion (ppb) in 2008, the Obama EPA proposed in January 2010
to further tighten the standard to between 60 to 70 ppb. But this proposal is quite controversial
as its underlying science is questionable, and it would be very expensive and inconvenient to implement and
comply with.

Do
carbon emissions actually pose a health risk? When Republican lawmakers introduced legislation
this week to block efforts by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate carbon, environmental
groups pushed back hard. And this time, the groups stepped up their efforts by attempting to shift the
argument from being about climate change science and green jobs to public health safety. In a press
release sent out Thursday, the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) attacked the proposal as a "serious
health setback."

The Editor asks...
Was no one healthy before the EPA was created?

EPA-GE waiver story not over yet.
Kudos to Tim Carney for exposing the EPA's greenhouse gas emissions waiver for the proposed Avenal (CA) power
plant which intends to buy gas and steam turbines from General Electric. But there's possibly much more
to the story. First, the EPA has not yet granted the waiver to GE. According to a Jan. 31, 2011
court declaration by EPA air chief Gina McCarthy, the EPA is planning to seek public comment on a proposal to
grant the waiver.

EPA's Mercurial Hypocrisy.
How cynical is the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency about the potential mercury hazard of compact
fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs)? Last week the EPA issued new guidance for the clean-up of mercury-containing
CFLs.

Note
To Republicans: Don't Just Rein in the EPA, Abolish It. It's clear that President Richard Nixon's
goal in creating the EPA was to put an agency in place that would fill a research and advisory role for both
himself and future presidents. There was no indication that he intended an ideologically driven
juggernaut that not only researched but actually took unto itself the power to mandate the most stringent
of eco-centered, blatantly anti-capitalist environmental guidelines and regulations imaginable.

Defund the EPA.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has hit the ground running with its greenhouse-gas regulations.
But congressional Republicans are just getting around to introducing well-intended, but futile legislation
to stop the agency. There is another way. The GOP could rescue us from the EPA as soon as March,
but it won't. Does the GOP have a secret strategy? Has it forgotten the election? Or is it
afraid of the EPA?

Don't Mess With Texas. The
federal government is once again overstepping its authority by messing with Texas. Last month, the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) leadership continued their game of hardball by stripping Texas of its
authority to issue greenhouse gas permits. It is painfully obvious that the EPA is making an example out
of Texas. Out of the 13 states that initially objected to the EPA's efforts to regulate, Texas is
the only one who has not surrendered to the intrusion of the federal government. As a result, the EPA
is punishing Texas for not giving in to their demands.

EPA,
Oklahoma Clash Over Regional Haze Plan. Oklahoma environmental officials, consumer
advocates, and environmental groups are clashing with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
over regional haze standards that could cause electricity prices to rise by more than 15 percent
in the state. EPA's Regional Haze Rule requires states to implement EPA-approved plans to reduce
haze at national parks and wilderness areas. EPA has authority to implement its own plan in states
without plans approved by EPA.

The Editor says...HAZE? If that's the worst problem they can find, the air is in pretty good shape
and the EPA can be eliminated. Every state has
an environmental agency of its own, so who needs the EPA anyway?

EPA Goes After Perchlorate and
Chromium: The Media Follow Along Without Questioning. Perchlorate and chromium
are on EPA's bucket list of 'toxic chemicals' on which it proposes to set new limits. Neither
has been given fair coverage by the main-stream media. Quotes can be found from environmental
groups supporting the action, but nothing from scientists and others with an opposing view, typical
of the unbalanced reporting that has covered the perchlorate and chromium issues.

EPA Will Destroy Jobs, Not Create
Them. One of the hot political debates raging in Washington is the effect the EPA — and
specifically, its plans to regulate greenhouse gas emissions — is having on businesses. According
to the WSJ, trade associations and businesses single out the EPA as the #1 target when they complain
about stifling federal burdens.

Stop
EPA's Energy Tax. At a contentious hearing on legislation to keep the EPA from regulating
carbon dioxide as a pollutant, Republicans rightly called global warming a power-grabbing hoax that is
all pain for no gain. The assertion came at a Wednesday hearing before the House subcommittee on
energy and power on the "Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011." The measure is designed to reassert
the authority of Congress to levy taxes on the American people and direct public policy — powers that
are being usurped by the unelected bureaucrats at the Environmental Protection Agency.

Congress
Must Derail President Obama's Backdoor EPA Power Grab. In last year's budget, President Obama
called for Congress to enact cap-and-trade legislation, using a slush fund to disguise the cost of the program.
But cap-and-trade was decisively rejected in the 2010 election, so this year President Obama's budget simply
funds the EPA to move forward with regulating greenhouse gases on its own — against the clear
wishes of voters and without any legitimate legislative basis. Congress must take responsibility,
step in, and stop this power grab.

The EPA's
Latest Unscientific Power Grab. Why would the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) overturn its own
scientists and decide to regulate trace levels of perchlorate in drinking water after it recently decided it didn't
need to be regulated? ... When the EPA reviewed the chemical's safety profile in 2008, it found that the low level
of perchlorate in water supplies did not present a health concern that could be reduced by regulation.
And there haven't been groundbreaking studies to change that. Nor does it cite any major change in our
exposure to the chemical.

Put the REINS on EPA. The
"Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny" Act could put the kibosh on the EPA's greenhouse
regulatory surge.

The
Airhead At EPA. The head of the Environmental Protection Agency's office of air and radiation
admits she doesn't know how much carbon dioxide is in the atmosphere. How can someone so ignorant have
such an important job?

Close the EPA. As
Congress looks for ways to trim the budget, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) represents an opportunity
for up to $9 billion in savings. This outfit has become little more than an advocacy group for trendy
leftist causes operating on the public's dime. Many liberal policies being promoted are so unpopular that
congressional Democrats can't muster the votes to get them through the proper legislative process. So
they go to the EPA instead.

Beware the Wrath of the EPA. Just when you
think you have heard it all, bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., come up with some hair-brained idea that leaves you
scratching your head in wonderment. The Environmental Protection Agency has apparently run out of things to
regulate and tax, so it has come up with new guidelines for regulating "particulate matter emissions" — more
commonly known to you and me as "dust."

The Powers of This
President. Not all the powers President Obama has wielded or claimed seem clearly identifiable
in the U.S. Constitution. ... [For example, the] Federal Communications Commission (FCC) assumed regulatory
authority over the internet and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) assumed regulatory authority over
greenhouse gases though Congress had not empowered either to do so.

House
panel votes to bar EPA tailpipe emission regulations. A House panel approved a bill to block
the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating tailpipe emissions — but the measure's future
is uncertain. The bill sponsored by Rep. Fred Upton, R-St. Joseph, chairman of the House Energy and
Commerce Committee, and Rep. Ed Whitfield, R-Ky., would overturn a 2007 Supreme Court decision that said the EPA
has the legal right to regulate tailpipe emissions as a danger to public health under the Clean Air Act.

EPA will raise gas prices.
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson asserted today [3/11/2011] that the Energy Tax Prevention Act "would increase our oil
dependence by hundreds of millions of gallons" because it would remove EPA's authority to regulate carbon
dioxide from automobiles under the Clean Air Act — and thereby forgo "hundreds of millions of barrels of
oil savings." This is false. Congress gave explicit authority to the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA) to establish fuel economy in automobiles, otherwise known as Corporate Average
Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. The Energy Tax Prevention Act in no way restricts or impedes NHTSA's
authority over CAFE.

The
EPA's dim bulbs. After weathering a winter of intimidation, Mayor Bloomberg has apparently
capitulated to an Environmental Protection Agency scare campaign. The issue: PCBs —
three little letters that are about to sock New York schools with another $700 million funding
drain. The supposedly toxic chemicals are found in old light fixtures in classrooms all over.
The feds want them replaced — no matter the cost.

Shipwrecked by the EPA.
Radical greens are using the devastating earthquake and tsunami in Japan as an excuse to peddle their wacko, pet
theories and push for more stringent environmental regulation. Such efforts literally ship U.S. jobs
overseas. On Thursday [3/10/2011], Carnival Cruise Lines announced it will move Elation from Mobile, Ala.,
to Port Canaveral, Fla., so the ship can spend more time in international waters. The culprit is higher
fuel costs, which will be exacerbated when the Environmental Protection Agency begins enforcing tough new
emissions standards next year.

Obama greens
turn yellow. Environmentalists are backpedaling in their long march toward
deindustrialization. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has offered to delay some of
its plans to regulate so-called greenhouse gases. Republicans in Congress shouldn't hesitate to
press their advantage. The agency's advance faltered last week with the announcement that it
was willing to put off for three years new rules requiring biomass-fired boilers to obtain permits
to emit carbon dioxide.

Full-Throttle
Drill, Drill, Drill. In the fact sheet that accompanied the speech, there's a lot of talk
about "responsible development" for natural gas fracking chemicals, state regulators, tapping experts, the
environmental community, and protecting public health and the environment. In other words, the standards
for new drilling could be so high that there won't be that much new drilling. The president doesn't
discuss the role of the EPA, which is going after coal, natural gas, and oil.

EPA's War on American
Industry. The regulation of greenhouses under the Clean Air Act was triggered by EPA's determination
that such gases pose a danger to human health. This is not because they actually pose any danger to human
health, like real pollutants, but rather because their accumulation in the upper atmosphere could contribute to
"dangerous warming" by 2050. Carbon dioxide is a ubiquitous product of all economic activity and of everything
that breathes. Giving EPA the power to regulate it is tantamount to letting it control virtually the whole
economy.

Having Solved All The World's Other Problems...The
EPA Takes On The Deadly Scourge Of ... Hand Soap. The environmentalists pushing this
issue want the EPA and/or the FDA to ban Triclosan, but there seems to be little evidence that the
substance is problematic. It's been used in anti-bacterial soap since the 1920's, and the last
time I checked there haven't been any health epidemics kicked off by the use of Triclosan. What's
more, the FDA reports that "Triclosan is not currently known to be hazardous to humans," though they
couch that statement in a bit of uncertainty. Scientists, after all, never like making absolute
statements. They'll never admit that something couldn't be true. Only that they
don't know something to be true.

They're coming for
your hand soap. Antimicrobial hand soaps and body washes are very popular, especially
in cold and flu season. They've been found to be effective in limiting the spread of bacteria,
which is why they're so popular. But, like anything people like, there are people who don't
like it, and the people who don't like something are rarely content until their will is imposed upon
everyone else. In this case, the people who don't like it are the left-wing environmentalists
who don't seem to like much of anything humans concoct to improve people's quality of life. Their
usual modus operandi is being followed in this case. Rather than trying to make a case for or
against something, these groups have taken to the courts.

Now
Obama's EPA is going after your soap. Under the Obama administration, the EPA has been transformed
into a job-killing machine. ... While many are aware of the fight against cap and trade and the EPA's regulation
of greenhouse gas emissions, the totality of their smaller actions, which often go unnoticed, is starting to
add up. They already tell us what kinds of light bulbs we can use and how much water we are allowed
to have in our toilets. Now, they have their sights set on our soap.

EPA owns the
American Lung Association. At today's House Energy and Commerce Committee mark-up of
the Upton-Inhofe bill to strip EPA of its authority to regulate greenhouse gases, Rep. Lois Capps
(D-Calif.) tried to defend the EPA by offering a recent American Lung Association poll that purports
to show public opinion favoring the EPA. What Congress needs to know, however, is that the
American Lung Association is bought-and-paid-for by the EPA. In the last 10 years, the
EPA has given the ALA $20,405,655, according to EPA records.

And the
Beat-Down Goes On. EPA needs to start basing its policies and rules on science, reality,
common sense, and comprehensive public health considerations. Congress needs to reassert its authority
over EPA. Both need to focus on responsible, science-based air and water quality standards that address
real health and economic needs — and recognize that "human health and welfare" means more than
eliminating every vestige of US manmade emissions, especially when we can do absolutely nothing about the
vast majority of natural and manmade global emissions.

Numerous EPA justifications questioned if not debunked:Nitwit defends EPA.
Former Republican EPA administrators William Ruckelshaus and Christine Todd Whitman authored [an opinion
article] that appeared in today's [3/25/2011] Washington Post. Ruckelshaus' unjustified ban of DDT in
1972 has led to the deaths of tens of millions of Africans. Whitman is an airhead — at the
time she was appointed as EPA administrator, she actually didn't know the difference between global warming
and ozone depletion.

Pushing Back
against a Decree. Since taking office, Pres. Barack Obama has shown a remarkable penchant for
changing the law by fiat. From Citizenship and Immigration Services' debating how best to let the
maximum number of illegal aliens off the hook to the EPA's declaring it would treat carbon-dioxide emissions
as a pollutant, the administration has taken the stance that votes in Congress aren't really necessary, even
for dramatically contentious subjects. Who needs a debate and a vote when you can rule by regulatory
decree?

Defund EPA's enablers.
NPR is not the only partisan political organization that ought to have its public funding cut. Congress
should put the American Lung Association (ALA) on the chopping block, too. ... Although greenhouse gas emissions
have nothing to do with air quality — colorless, odorless carbon dioxide is labeled a greenhouse gas
and causes no adverse health effects — the ALA is nevertheless trying to stir up hometown opposition
to Mr. Upton with its over-the-top attack ad. This isn't ALA's only attack on Congress' effort to
rein in the out-of-control Obama EPA.

EPA Awards $550,000
to Battle Bed Bugs. The Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday [4/6/2011] announced it is
awarding grants totaling $550,000 to five organizations to "implement new approaches in managing bed bug
problems." Most of the money will be used for the benefit of poor, immigrant and minority communities —
where the problem is "significant, the EPA says, but resources to address it are "limited."

The Editor says...
Bedbugs were all but completely eliminated decades ago
[1]
[2]
[3]
through the use
of DDT. If
there are any bedbugs in this country today, blame the EPA.

Top 10 Spending Cuts Thwarted by
Democrats: [#4] Environmental Protection Agency: Republicans want to cut
billions from the Environmental Protection Agency's budget. Nothing could be better for the
economy than to starve this agency, which is trying to regulate greenhouse gas emissions on its
own after Congress failed to pass the cap-and-trade energy bill.

Suppressed
EPA Hushgate climate report returns to snag CO2 regulation. Inside the National Center for
Environmental Economics, analysts scurried to finish the vital technical support document to fulfill
President Obama's most draconian campaign pledge: "Implement an economywide cap-and-trade program
to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent by 2050." The NCEE was ready to cement the case
for the Environmental Protection Agency's "endangerment finding," the official declaration that carbon
dioxide from burning fossil fuels poses a threat to human health and welfare. Thousands of government
careers, academic contracts, and Big Green grants hung in the balance, and EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson
needed to release it within days.

EPA
Boss to Speak at Youth Climate Conference With Van Jones and International Socialists. On Saturday [4/16/2011],
the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency Lisa Jackson will be giving the keynote speech at the Energy
Action Coalition's Power Shift 2011 conference, a meeting of potentially 10,000 green youth activists in Washington,
D.C. ... As a final chuckle, Nobel Laureate Al Gore will also be speaking to attendees Friday evening.
Although it certainly is no surprise that he doesn't mind hanging out with socialists, this should forever end the
question about just how closely tied the global warming agenda is to this far-left political ideology.

Jobs Don't Matter To the EPA.
The EPA doesn't look at the impact on jobs at all when they issue regulations. They don't
consider jobs to be part of a "detailed economic analysis." That goes a long way toward explaining why
President Obama keeps talking about his "economic recovery" when every week seems to bring fresh "unexpected"
news about the shrinking U.S. workforce.

EPA
official says jobs don't matter. The Obama administration has repeatedly said job
creation is a top priority, but apparently the memo seems to have missed the bureaucrats at the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This became evident when EPA Assistant Administrator
Mathy Stanislaus testified Thursday [4/14/2011] before an Environment and Energy subcommittee hearing
that his agency does not take jobs into account when it issues new regulations.

EPA's faith-based agitprop.
The Obama administration is re-embracing faith-based initiatives — with a twist. The Environmental
Protection Agency on Monday [4/18/2011] announced the formation of a Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships
Initiative that will reinvigorate the agency's outreach efforts. Instead of supporting abstinence programs
or charitable efforts, the idea is to ensure mosques are illuminated by mercury-filled light bulbs and evacuated
by low-flow toilets. It's a funny thing when the left discovers such a vocation. President George W.
Bush first came up with the idea of encouraging private alternatives to government handouts, and he was blasted
by liberal groups like Americans for Democratic Action. They insisted faith-based initiatives were an
unconstitutional violation of the separation between church and state.

EPA's train wreck
could leave many in the dark. Even with 14 million Americans out of work and an economy
still searching for light at the end of the tunnel, the EPA is poised to enact a series of back-door
mandates that will stifle economic growth. And with the speed that this runaway train is traveling,
people in states like Ohio should be scared of the "train wreck" headed towards a town near you.
Unfortunately, everyday Americans may not realize the impact of the EPA's "train wreck" of new regulations
on jobs, the economy and the price of essential energy until it's too late.

EPA Regulations Strangling America.
Right now, someone is sitting at a large oak table in the EPA's marble palace in Washington, D.C., sipping a
vanilla latte and dreaming up a new rule to impose. Without fail, the EPA continues to come up with ideas
that leave you scratching your head in wonderment because of the questionable science used to justify these
regulations. Instead of protecting the environment, these rules dreamed up by the EPA in Washington are
destroying American industry and killing job creation, which is just what our economy needs right now.
This type of federal meddling is exactly what causes companies to lay off workers, move overseas, and in many
cases, fail. The purpose of the Environmental Protection Agency is to protect the environment —
not to regulate American industry into nonexistence.

Obama's
Regulatory Tsunami More Destructive than Taxes. As Obama travels about the country, speaking
of the need for "shared sacrifice" and the need to increase taxes, he doesn't say a word about the tsunami
of new Obama regulations ranging from light bulbs to ozone pollution to painkillers to foreign travel to
vending machines that is about to hit America. Their impact will be huge and do serious damage to our
economy. Obama's regulatory tsunami began during his first month in office and has continued
relentlessly since.

Obama's
Other Hand. While we were distracted by the president's birth certificate show-and-tell, his EPA
releases its guidelines for expanding federal power under the Clean Water Act. America's economy and
freedom are at stake.

'Change'
via executive power grab. The Environmental Protection Agency has ruled that Shell Oil Co. may
not drill for oil this summer in the Arctic Circle off Alaska, where an estimated 27 billion barrels of
domestic oil are waiting to be extracted. Never mind that Shell's already spent nearly $4 billion
on the project, including $2.2 billion to Uncle Sam for the leases. No, the EPA's appeals board
said the oil giant had failed to include possible greenhouse-gas emissions from an icebreaking vessel in its
calculations and that the project might somehow threaten the health of the 245 people in an Eskimo village
70 miles away.

EPA suburban sprawl
brawl. It's no secret that what was once the Land of the Free is becoming the home of red tape
and federal control — especially under President Obama. Things are so out of hand that
bureaucrats who are paid to hector citizens into conformity find themselves caught between contradictory
enviro-principles.

Back
on EPA's enemies list: your fridge. Remember when the Environmental Protection Agency's ban on
chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs, because they punched holes in the ozone layer, forced refrigerator manufacturers
to switch to more environmentally friendly refrigerants? ... It turns out that HFCs require more electricity to
produce the same amount of cooling. Who knew? Which means that ozone-saving fridges make bigger
carbon footprints than their ozone-destroying counterparts. Something Must Be Done before the fridge
destroys the polar bear! But never fear. The EPA is already on the case.

Regulating CO2 Is Based On A Lie That
Hides The Real Data. We are going to have a vote this week in the Senate on whether we should
throw billions of dollars and millions of jobs down the toilet because of some Green-Eyed liberal fantasy
about CO2 causing global warming. It is important for the American people to understand that pulling
the EPA's authority to control all energy and businesses through a mythological effort to save the planet
is actually going to save the planet — from power hungry fools. The entire argument for
regulating CO2 is based on a series of falsehoods, which when exposed make the argument for why the EPA
needs to be reigned in.

Interior
Department auctions off shore oil leases, EPA says you can't drill. If the Justice Department
weren't in on this scam, they'd be investigating the bait and switch tactics the Obama administration uses
on the oil industry. First you take billions of dollars from an oil company for an offshore lease,
then you come up with an absurd excuse to stop them from drilling.

The EPA's War on
Energy Producer Range Resources. Even before America slit its wrists by electing him, Barack Hussein
Obama gave us a preview of his energy policy by promising to use deliberately excessive regulation to bankrupt coal
plants. The objective in destroying the energy sector is twofold: 1) devastate our still quasi-capitalist
economy, creating enough hardship to pave the way for true socialism; and 2) pander to gullible morons in the
Democrat base who actually believe that using energy makes it be too hot out for the polar bears. For the most
part, this malignant agenda is carried out by what is emerging as the most pernicious and the most powerful agency in
the entire federal behemoth: the EPA.

Puddle Power Grab.
Barack Obama's EPA means to implement the major provisions of failed legislation by regulatory means, a massive
power grab with frightening implications. But with the American media preoccupied with a royal wedding
and the assassination of Osama bin Laden, almost nobody seems to have noticed when late last month an important
announcement was made by the Environmental Protection Agency. ... The administration would have us believe it
to be concerned about water quality, but the real issues are land, power and control. If implemented,
EPA guidelines will allow the agency to decide the extent of their jurisdiction over every body of water of
any size and eventually result in binding regulations that will affect us all.

White House opposes combining Energy Department
and EPA. The Obama administration "unequivocally opposes" a Senate GOP bill to merge the EPA and
Energy Department into one super-agency. The White House statement to POLITICO came in response to Sen.
Richard Burr (R-N.C.), the bill's sponsor, telling reporters that the administration found the proposal
"intriguing."

The Editor says...
If it were up to me, I would eliminate both of them.

Gas Prices
Are High Because the Liberals Want It that Way. [Scroll down] Last month, Shell Oil
Company announced it was forced to scrap efforts to drill for oil in the Arctic Ocean off the northern coast
of Alaska. The decision comes following a ruling by the EPA's Environmental Appeals Board to withhold
critical air permits. If there was ever a clarion call to strip the EPA of its oil drilling oversight,
this is it. Shell spent five years and nearly $4 billion on plans to explore for oil in the
Beaufort and Chukchi Seas. The leases alone cost $2.2 billion. The closest village to
where Shell proposed to drill is Kaktovik, nearly 70 miles away with a population of 245.

EPA
unveils new fuel economy labels. The Department of Transportation and the Environmental
Protection Agency unveiled the three types of new labels Wednesday [5/25/2011]. One type is for cars
that use gasoline or diesel, or hybrids that use only self-generated electricity. A second is for gas
and electric hybrids that use some plug-in electricity, and the third is for vehicles running strictly on
plug-in power.

End the EPA
Power Grab Completely. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) should not just delay but
outright end its greenhouse gas rules and other regulations designed to achieve a backdoor implementation of
cap-and-trade. The American people decisively rejected energy taxes and rationing in the 2010 election,
yet the administration has remaining committed to disregarding Congress and the American people.

EPA Bans Many Household
Rat and Mouse Poisons. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced on Tuesday [6/7/2011]
that it plans to ban the sale of "the most toxic rat and mouse poisons, as well as most loose bait and pellet
products" to residential customers. The goal is to better protect children, pets and wildlife.

EPA Protecting You Into An Early Grave.
The Environmental Protection Agency is always going on about the ways it "protects" everyone, but its greatest
achievement has been to protect them out of countless jobs eliminated by their regulations and restrictions.
Their latest diktat is directed at products that consumers can purchase to rid their homes, apartments, and
other facilities of mice and rats. If they keep it up, soon the only thing you will be able to purchase
is a mouse trap.

If Elected. [Scroll down]
I would make shutting down the Environmental Protection Agency a priority. It is a rogue agency that
appears to think it is not accountable to Congress or the American people. It is filled with fanatics
who have no regard for real science. It is costing the nations jobs and thwarting our energy needs.

'Rabid dogs' at the EPA.
Even New York City, run by nanny-state Mayor Michael Bloomberg, is crossing swords with Obama's EPA.
New York City's Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Caswell Holloway has sent a 15 page
letter to federal EPA head Lisa Jackson criticizing the EPA for expensive mandates that "provide virtually no
health benefits," and that make a mockery of President Obama's call for eliminating unnecessary regulations.

EPA regulations — our economy's
golden goose? Every dollar spent complying with federal regulations returned anywhere from
$2.13 to $14.90 during the 2000s, according to a new report from the White House Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). EPA rules accounted for approximately 84% of this alleged regulatory largesse.
Needless to say, the OMB report is total nonsense.

EPA's Clean Air
Act: Pretending air pollution is worse than it is. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) continues to tighten air quality standards at considerable societal expense under the guise that new
standards are necessary to protect public health. Focusing on the EPA's proposed Clean Air Transport
Rule (CATR), this analysis shows that: [1] America's air is already safe to breathe and it is
much better than the EPA would have the public believe; and that [2] The EPA relies on health
studies that exaggerate harm and economic studies that understate regulatory costs in order to maintain
the fiction that its ever more stringent regulations are providing meaningful public health benefits.

EPA
approves E15 fuel label despite engine risk. The government has settled on a label for gas
stations selling a blend of gasoline and ethanol called E15, which contains more ethanol — grain
alcohol — than the E10 blend that's replaced pure gasoline at most stations. The
Environmental Protection Agency previously approved E15 — 85% gasoline and
15% ethanol — for use in vehicles back to 2001 models. The approved label is part of
the EPA's final rule spelling out about how E15 can be sold and what standards it must meet.

Not that it really matters what they think...Car
manufacturers overwhelmingly oppose new EPA-approved E15 fuel. The automobile industry has responded to
a rule authorized by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that allows E15 fuel — 85 percent
gasoline, 15 percent ethanol — to be sold at gas stations across the country. In short:
the response is anything but supportive. Car manufacturers like Ford, BMW, Toyota and Honda, expressed disapproval
of the E15 mixture intended to help ween [sic] the industry off foreign oil.

Obama's assault
on the rule of law. [Scroll down] In 2008, the Senate voted against the "cap-and-trade"
bill that would have created a carbon-tax system and vast federal power to interfere in the energy market.
So the Environmental Protection Agency declared carbon dioxide a pollutant and has embarked on a massive scheme
to impose cap-and-trade through bureaucratic power. Meanwhile, Mr. Obama's green fascists have virtually
shut down new oil exploration and drilling.

The House Must
Stop the EPA. With unemployment unacceptably high and a new onslaught of Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) regulations about to crash into a stumbling economy, now is the time for the Republican Majority in
the House of Representatives to end the EPA's regulatory madness.

Who Controls the Price of Oil?
OPEC should not be able to burden consumers to the same extent now [as they did in the 1970's] because large
oil reserves were discovered in Alaska, North Sea, Canada, and the Gulf of Mexico. However our business-killing
EPA regulations and Obama's seven-year moratorium on drilling in the Gulf do.

The Greens Just Love Us to Death.
You may recall [the environmentalists] got off to a strong start when the Environmental Protection Agency was
established in 1970. Its first act was to ban DDT and the result of that has been the needless death of
millions who could and should have been protected against malaria. The nation these days is experiencing
a bed bug population explosion that could be stopped in six months if the EPA would only authorize a pesticide
to kill the critters. They won't.

The
EPA's Ethanol Boondoggle. Congress may have finally recognized the absurdity of subsidizing the
ethanol industry, but, unfortunately for America, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has its own agenda.
In January, the EPA issued a waiver that allowed E15 (gasoline with a 15 percent ethanol blend) to be
sold for vehicles with model years 2001 and later. This decision was made at the behest of the ethanol
industry, but it will come at the expense of American drivers.

EPA Vs.
Fireworks. The Environmental Protection Agency is at it again — this time eyeing smog standards
so stringent it could actually force cities to choose between July 4th fireworks and hugely expensive new rules.

Politics has overtaken
science at the EPA. Science depends on rigid observation and independent replication. So what
happens when government bureaucrats — seeking to promote a political agenda while acting under the guise of
protecting the environment and public health — systematically subordinate sound scientific principles to their
own goals? To answer that question, one need look no further than the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
where unelected bureaucrats, led by the chemophobic Lisa Jackson, have decided to bypass Congress and avoid the
possible change in administration in 2013 by rushing to complete an unprecedented number of major risk assessments
ahead of the 2012 election.

EPA Says
All Texas Plants Will Get New Air Permits. Nearly 140 Texas plants, including some of the nation's
largest refineries, have reached a deal with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to receive new permits even
though a long-standing battle between the Lone Star State and the federal agency is far from over.

House votes to block EPA on water pollution.
The House on Wednesday [7/13/2011] approved legislation to smack down the Obama administration's water pollution
policies, despite a looming veto threat from the White House. The chamber voted 239-184 to adopt a
bipartisan bill that seeks to limit EPA's authority over state water quality decisions after recent agency
actions have irked lawmakers, particularly in coal states and in Florida.

House
Republicans Accuse EPA, Enviros of Collusion. Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) believes that
U.S. EPA has worked out a nifty way to make an end run around both Congress and the federal regulatory
process when it wants to implement a new rule that may be politically sensitive. All the agency
has to do is get some green group to sue over some aspect of the desired rule, he said. Then EPA
can roll over in the ensuing legal battle and head right to settlement proceedings, claiming it was
"forced" by the court system and consent decrees to initiate the new rulemaking. It is a path devoid
of both messy public comment periods and political accusations over whether EPA is moving unilaterally.

Top 10 Most Egregious Government Regulations.
[#2] EPA's carbon dioxide fixation: Talk about job-killing regulations. The Environmental
Protection Agency's decision to regulate carbon dioxide emissions in order to combat "climate change" will
raise the cost of energy. Forget about creating jobs. The EPA's regulations will add a new burden
on business, increase the cost of material for the construction industry, and hit consumer in the pocketbook,
dampening the outlook for economic growth.

Industry: EPA hurts Obama in 2012.
Nine top business and industry officials walked into EPA headquarters Friday afternoon [7/15/2011] to tell agency
chief Lisa Jackson exactly what they think of her plans to tighten the federal ozone standard. But they left
the meeting convinced that EPA planned to stick to its guns and are now taking their case to a higher power:
The White House. They say the stricter ozone standards would hurt both industry and President Barack Obama's
chances for reelection.

The Tea Party,
Right About Everything. [Scroll down] The EPA now has power to regulate every use of
fossil fuels in this country, as well as every breath we take, if they so deem. What will it do with
that power? You get to guess. If you think it wouldn't do anything too stupid, know that the FDA
just outlawed common inhalers for asthma sufferers. Their reason was, get this, those inhalers are
blamed for contributing to upper-atmosphere ozone loss. Even if you think CFCs contribute to ozone
loss, how much do you think the CFCs released by asthma inhalers have to do with it?

EPA targets air pollution from gas
drilling boom. Faced with a natural gas drilling boom that has sullied the air in
some parts of the country, the Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday [7/28/2011] proposed for the first
time to control air pollution at oil and gas wells, particularly those drilled using a method called
hydraulic fracturing.

Latest
job killer from the EPA. The EPA's new standards are currently under review by the
Office of Management and Budget but could end up on the president's desk in the next few days.
If implemented, they would reduce the existing 0.075 parts per million (ppm) ozone standard under
the National Ambient Air Quality Standards program to 0.070 ppm or even 0.60 ppm.
This will mean that up to 85% of the counties currently monitored by the EPA would fall into "nonattainment"
status, exceeding the air-quality ozone standards and triggering a cascade of federal and state controls.
The EPA estimates these new standards could cost business anywhere from $20 billion to $90 billion
annually.

The EPA Nation-Killing Machine.
The problem with the Environmental Protection Agency is that it has "protected" the nation into a place where
corporations flee to other nations, exporting jobs no longer available here. When not doing that, it is
destroying the ability of whole industries — particularly energy — and of our agricultural
dynamo to function.

Report:
EPA should push 'sustainability,' track 'social' policy outcomes. The National Research
Council (NRC) has released a report laying out a framework for the Environmental Protection Agency to
incorporate sustainability into its policies this week. The report advises the EPA to make policy
decisions using a three-pillar system, examining environmental, economic, and social impacts.

Republican
to Obama: Create jobs by 'putting the brakes' on EPA 'train wreck'. House Energy and Commerce
Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) urged President Obama to reel in the Environmental Protection Agency
after a new report showed job creation continues to lag. "Millions of American jobs are in jeopardy
because of the costly rules proposed or under development by the EPA, and that's just one agency," Upton
said in a statement.

Rogue
EPA Targets Ozone — And Jobs. A beleaguered American economy may soon be subject
to ozone standards so stringent that Yellowstone National Park could not meet them. Look
forward to double-digit unemployment.

EPA's
new ozone regulations overburden local governments, say critics. The Environmental Protection Agency
is driving a new ozone regulatory agenda that critics say will cripple local governments, small businesses and
other industries nationwide. President Barack Obama's EPA aims to reduce the acceptable level of ozone
in any given region from 75 parts per billion to between 60 and 70 parts per billion.

Obama's
EPA is Killing More Jobs than Economy Can Create. Obama says he will get focused on the jobs problem
just as soon as he returns from his August vacation in Martha's Vineyard. ... But while Obama is playing jetsetter,
back in Washington a crucial regulatory agency, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), has been captured by a
group of extremists who actually believe the USA would be better off with a smaller economy. ... As long as
Obama leaves these extremists in charge of the agency, the economy is unlikely to recover and will suffer.

EPA
jumps the gun with job-killing rules. Twice this year, President Obama asked federal agencies to
review regulations to ensure that they are not interfering with efforts to rebuild the U.S. economy. In
January, he signed an executive order directing agencies to use the "least burdensome tools" that take "into
account benefits and cost" and "[promote] economic growth ... and job creation." Either the Environmental
Protection Agency didn't get the memo or it was lost under the growing stack of regulations the agency is advancing
at record speed.

Fallout From Day Zero: EPAgeddon Averted.
Do we still have to listen to Barack Obama complain that all these out-of-control agencies, like the EPA,
NLRB, and EEOC are "independent" and "beyond his control?" It looks as if white-knuckle panic
rather abruptly brought the EPA under his control.

Obama
Scraps Controversial EPA Smog Regulation. Bowing to the demands of House Republicans
and some business leaders, President Obama is backing off a controversial proposed regulation tightening
government smog standards. In a statement Friday [9/2/2011], Obama said he had ordered Environmental
Protection Agency administrator Lisa Jackson to withdraw the proposal, in part because of the importance
of reducing regulatory burdens and uncertainty for businesses at a time of rampant uncertainty about an
unsteady economy.

Critics
Say Obama EPA Moves Made With 2012 in Mind. While Republican foes and many in
the business community accuse President Obama of pushing aggressive environmental agenda, the
Obama EPA has actually been holding back on many of its key initiatives. Critics say the
go-slow approach at the Environmental Protection Agency is part of a 2012 re-election strategy
for the president.

What Did
Obama's EPA Stunt Cost? Obama's Friday-before-Labor-Day news-dump was a politically
panicked, long overdue if temporary walkback of a proposed $1 trillion dollar rule out of
EPA — just one of a suite of assaults on jobs known collectively, colloquially as the 'train wreck".

Cost
Of Clean Air. On the Friday before Labor Day, a moment he hoped his green constituency would be
too busy celebrating the workers of the world to hear the news, President Obama withdrew drafted rules intended
to cut smog levels. ... The green lobby pretends the environmental rules it peddles don't hurt the economy.
Yet we have an implicit admission from a president tied to that lobby that the economic benefits of scuttling
a regulation are greater than the regulation's ecological benefits.

More EPA Regulations.
The EPA continues to produce ideas that leave you scratching your head because of the questionable science used
to justify these regulations. Instead of protecting the environment, these rules are destroying American
industry and killing job creation.

Re-election
trumps phony green hype. According to a painstaking analysis last year by Mr. Obama's
Environmental Protection Agency based on more than 1,700 scientific studies, dramatic new air-quality
guidelines are needed to lower ground-level smog from the current 0.075 parts per million to as low
as 0.060 ppm. That, according to the EPA's study, would save the lives of as many as
12,000 Americans. ... Then, late last week, in a stunning turnabout, the president quietly announced
his decision to junk the new ozone standards — sentencing, according to the administration's
own calculus, 12,000 Americans to die.

EPA:
Fundamental Transformation through Regulation. What happens when the information
our government's "specialists" provide becomes driven by agenda rather than fact? ... The EPA,
finding organized resistance to its regulating machine, has turned to offering "guidance," which
it then enforces as if said "guidance" were the product of regulatory channels. The big
difference, of course, is that "guidance" is not subject to the same rigors of accountability and
oversight that regulations must meet. These crone-tended kettles at the EPA are really just
an end-run around the law.

Cattle
Feeder Says EPA Declared Hay a Pollutant. In a news release last week, the Environmental
Protection Agency labeled hay a pollutant, according to the Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United
Stockgrowers of America (R-CALF USA). A non-profit organization representing thousands of U.S. cattle
producers, R-CALF USA says the EPA's outlandish affidavit could potentially require farmers and ranchers
to store hay in pollution containment zones. The issue culminated from an EPA compliance order
charging Callicrate Feeding Company with a list of environmental violations.

Big Labor Clashes
With Green Groups. Last week, Obama angered environmentalist groups by scrapping the
administration's proposed EPA clean air regulations. And now the St. Louis chapter of the
AFL-CIO has also come out against the environmental regulations, which it says will have a detrimental
impact on Missouri jobs.

Farmers
Worry Over Crop of New Rules. Farmers are concerned that some new, tighter federal
regulations on agriculture are stunting the growth of their businesses and say regulatory uncertainty
makes it difficult for them to plan for the future.

The EPA's
Most-Wanted List. Everyone knows about the FBI's famous "Ten Most Wanted" list. The
current roster includes murderers, racketeers, kidnappers, drug smugglers, and armed robbers —
criminals who represent real dangers to society. But did you know that the Environmental Protection
Agency also has its own FBI-type list of 18 most-wanted environmental fugitives?

White
House threatens veto over House attack on EPA pollution rules. President Obama's advisers will
recommend that he veto pending House legislation that would block two key Environmental Protection Agency
air-pollution rules, a White House official said. "As the President has made clear, the administration
will continue to take steps to defend the authority of the Clean Air Act, and the important progress we have
made to protect the air we breathe," the official said.

The Editor blurts out...
Yeah, but there's nothing wrong with the air we breathe.

The Case for
Ending the EPA. The one exception to the law that it's easier to destroy than create is big
government programs and bureaucracies. Once they're the status quo and people become accustomed to
their existence, folks just cannot imagine how they could live without them. But is it really true
that we'd get a visit from the Smog Monster if the EPA went extinct? And does it really advance the
good on balance?

How did anyone survive before the EPA existed?Dems:
Heart attacks, asthma, deformed babies if EPA reined in. House Democrats on Thursday evening [9/22/2011]
warned that Republican attempts to rein in Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations would lead directly
to adverse health effects across America.

EPA
To Shut Down 20% of Coal Plants in 2012. Susan Kraemer at CleanTechnica can barely contain her
excitement at the prospect of environmental regulations. In an article titled "Obama's EPA Cues
130 Billion Race to Cut Pollution By 2015", she reports that the EPA will shut down 20 percent of
coal plants through the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule. She acknowledges the cost of these regulations
($130 billion), but insists that this is actually good for the economy. How, pray tell, does
$130 billion in regulatory expenses transform into a $130 billion boon?

EPA:
Regulations would require 230,000 new employees, $21 billion. The Environmental Protection
Agency has said new greenhouse gas regulations, as proposed, may be "absurd" in application and "impossible to
administer" by its self-imposed 2016 deadline. But the agency is still asking for taxpayers to shoulder
the burden of up to 230,000 new bureaucrats — at a cost of $21 billion — to
attempt to implement the rules.

5
Major Ways The Obama Administration Is Killing American Jobs. [#3] The EPA: The EPA has
been waging a one bureaucracy war against American business and capitalism for a long while, but it's
stepping up its attacks to draconian levels under the Obama Administration. The EPA is pushing new
greenhouse gas rules that could cost "7.3 million jobs and add $32.2 billion annually in new
regulatory costs."

EPA Monster Sighted in Kansas.
Under the current EPA director, Lisa Jackson, the Obama administration is unleashing on the country the most
comprehensive and far-reaching environmental regulations ever seen.

Obama jobs
plan: More bureaucrats. The [EPA] is defending sweeping greenhouse-gas emissions rules that if
fully implemented would require 10,000 new state-level employees to process permits. At the federal
level, it would take 230,000 new officials and a $21 billion budget expansion — quite a boost
for an outfit that currently has 17,417 bureaucrats and $10.3 billion to spend. EPA admits it would
be "absurd or impossible to administer" the rules all at once, but "that does not mean that the agency is not
moving toward the statutory thresholds."

EPA
Inspector General calls greenhouse-gas regulatory process flawed. In response to a report that
could lead to questions about the credibility of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Oklahoma
Republican Sen. James Inhofe, ranking member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, is
calling for hearings to investigate. The report — from the Office of the Inspector General
of the EPA — reveals that the scientific basis, on which the administration's endangerment
finding for greenhouse gases hinged, violated the EPA's own peer review procedure.

Texas
EPA Czar Pushes 'Urgency' Drilling Regulations. Fearing President Barack Obama might not get
re-elected to the White House in 2012, Texas EPA Czar, Al Armendariz, a professor at Southern Methodist
University in Dallas, called for greater "urgency" in getting oil and gas fields in the Lone Star to be
declared as "health hazards."

'Consensus'
science, global warming, and Obama's reality-blind EPA. [Scroll down] ["]Scientists
studying sunspots for the past two decades have concluded that the magnetic field that triggers their formation
has been steadily declining. If the current trend continues, by 2016 the sun's face may become spotless and
remain that way for decades — a phenomenon that in the 17th century coincided with a prolonged
period of cooling on Earth.["] That "prolonged period of cooling?" That would be the Little Ice Age,
during which the Thames River froze over in London and New Yorkers walked from Manhattan to Staten Island —
on ice. So then, why is the EPA saddling American businesses with a plethora of new "greenhouse gas"
emission regulations aimed at stopping "global warming?"

Floridians
Fight Back Against EPA Water Nutrient Restrictions. Burdened by a 10.6 percent unemployment
rate and a collapsed housing market, Florida's shaky economy now faces a new challenge: The Sunshine State
is squarely in the bull's eye of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's regulatory artillery. EPA is
proposing tough new restrictions on levels of phosphorous and nitrogen in the state's waterways. The new
standards, known as numeric nutrient criteria, apply only to Florida and will affect every industry and
resident in the state.

Louisiana
Man Wins $1.7 Million From EPA For Malicious Prosecution. The legal might of the U.S. government
is usually enough to roll right over someone like Opelousas, La. plant manager Hubert Vidrine Jr. But
last week the underdog had his day: a federal court awarded Vidrine $1.7 million for having been
maliciously prosecuted by the federal Environmental Protection Agency.

Democrat Strategies Right Out
Of V.I. Lenin Playbook. Vladimir Lenin, leader of the socialist revolution in Russia, published
multiple tutorials for like-minded revolutionaries around the world. Someone in the Obama administration
must be familiar with his writings. Socialist minds think alike. ... According to Lenin's
rule, it is strategically appropriate for President Obama to halt all policies that are
inconvenient to his election. That's why regulations like the EPA ozone plan, which would impose
tremendous regulatory burdens on manufacturing in the USA, and the full-blown implementation of
ObamaCare, will wait until after the presidential election of 2012.

EPA's
CO2 endangerment finding is endangered. In a narrow 5-4 decision in 2007, the US Supreme Court
authorized the EPA to consider the greenhouse gas CO2 as a 'pollutant' under the terms of the Clean Air
Act — provided EPA could demonstrate that CO2 posed a threat to human health and welfare.
The EPA then issued an Endangerment Finding (EF) in 2009, which was promptly challenged in the DC Circuit
Court of Appeals.

Corn-fueled politics.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) wants to shove more ethanol into your gas tank. Obama administration
bureaucrats have signed off on a crony-capitalist scheme to boost the corn content of gasoline from 10 percent
to 15 percent. This serves absolutely no purpose beyond enriching farm-state agribusiness giants.
In fact, it may even result in the voiding of millions of new-car warranties.

With Obama's re-election more and more unlikely...EPA
will not tighten farm dust standards. The Environmental Protection Agency said Friday it will
not tighten controls on farm dust, the latest effort to quell concerns by Republicans and others that the
agency will impose new regulations on the agriculture industry. In a letter to Sen. Debbie Stabenow
(D-Mich.), EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said she will soon recommend to the White House Office of Management
and Budget that existing regulations governing coarse particulate matter from industrial and agricultural
operations — often called farm dust — remain in place.

Shovel Ready Means Never Ready. We
hear a lot these days about the need for "shovel ready jobs" and the lack of them, as well as the "do-nothing
Congress". For those who want answers, not excuses, let's visit some of the places where job preventers work.
First stop: The home of the President of the United States and his Administration's Environmental Protection
Agency. This group steals more jobs and wealth in one week than a corporate jet full of greedy bankers in a lifetime.

EPA to Regulate Dirt.
House members of the Energy and Commerce Committee bickered about the definition of dust in a hearing
about a Republican bill to stop overreaching Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations.
Democrats at the hearing on the Farm Dust Regulation Act of 2011, sponsored by Rep. Kristi Noem
(R.-S.D.), fired a number of vicious shots at the the bill, calling it merely a red herring.
They claimed that the EPA doesn't regulate dust at all, and that the wording of the bill was intended
to strip the EPA's power to regulate other destructive particulates, such as soot from urban factories.

EPA IG Finds Serious Flaws in Centerpiece of Obama Global
Warming Agenda. Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Environment
and Public Works, today [9/28/2011] announced that a new government report from the Office of Inspector General (OIG) of the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reveals that the scientific assessment underpinning the Obama EPA's
endangerment finding for greenhouse gasses was inadequate and in violation of the Agency's own peer review
procedures.

Obama's
Class Warfare: It's All He's Got Left. [Scroll down] He has substantially ramped up excessive
anti-business regulations in pursuit of the environmental crusade of the week. He tried to pass cap and tax,
which would have made things much worse, and when he couldn't get Congress to go along, he had his Environmental
Protection Agency unlawfully impose unprecedented emission regulations.

Dust in the Wind: Time for the EPA to Go!
Everywhere I had gone in Iowa, people had been complaining about the proposed dust rule. Senator Chuck
Grassley, a senior and informed leader in the Senate, had been speaking out against the rule aggressively.
In fact, he had a staff person assigned to fighting the EPA over the proposed rule. The assertion that it
was never considered was plainly dishonest. Although there was never a formal proposal to create the
rule, the prospect of stricter dust regulations had been on the table for months after EPA panels gave conflicting
recommendations. Since the EPA makes no distinctions between urban, industrial dust and dust from agriculture
or rural roads, many rural Americans were justifiably terrified that the agency was dragging its feet. It was
not until mid-October that the EPA finally said it wouldn't tighten the rules, as its panel had recommended.

How the EPA Is Like DDT.
Asthma is a perplexing disease for which, according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), there is no known
cause. According CDC statistics, the percentage of the general population with asthma increased by 265% from
1980 to 2009. According to EPA statistics, from 1980 to 2009, the emissions of sulfur dioxide when down by
about 76% and, from 1995 to 2009, emissions of nitrogen dioxide went down by about 48%. There is no statistical
relationship or known causal relationship between asthma and emissions of these compounds. Yet, when announcing
the new cross-state emissions rules in 2011 to further restrict emissions of these compounds, EPA Administrator Lisa
Jackson claimed, without evidence, the new regulations will prevent 400,000 new cases of asthma each year.

The EPA's Reliability
Cover-Up. Some 830,000 Connecticut customers are only now having their power restored after a snowstorm
knocked out the state's grid last month — but the Environmental Protection Agency continues to claim
that its regulatory agenda won't degrade U.S. electric reliability. The reality is that the EPA's own staffers
are — or used to be — worried, and their political superiors have erased the warnings.
In recent months, concerns have been growing that the agency's torrent of new air-pollution rules will lead to
blackouts or to the rolling outages that crisscrossed California and Arizona in September.

EPA: By 2025, Pigs
Will Fly. Washington's press corps this afternoon dutifully parroted the White House announcement
that by 2025, cars must get 54.5 mpg. ... But for harder numbers, how are the automakers doing on the more
immediate EPA mandate of 35.5 mpg by 2015? They're not even close.

Fast
Trains and Slow, Puny, Expensive Cars. Because the Obama EPA has declared carbon dioxide a
'pollutant,' and because cars emit CO2, [EPA administrator Lisa] Jackson is citing the Clean Air Act in her bid
to commandeer Detroit." The Journal reports that even the EPA's own (no doubt low-ball) estimates show
that the rule will cost $157 billion and raise the price of cars by $3,100 per vehicle.

The United States of
EPA. The EPA heaved its weight against another industry this month, issuing a regulation to sharply
increase fuel economy. Under this new rule, America's fleet of passenger cars and light trucks will have to
meet an average of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025, a doubling of today's average of about 27 mpg.

Will
The EPA Choke Oil Shale Production? The latest salvo in the administration's war on energy may be new
rules and permits to regulate a process to get oil and gas from porous rock, sacrificing jobs and economic growth
while under review.

Obama
Administration and EPA Use Clean Water Act for New Overreach. Just as the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has used the Clean Air Act to broaden the scope of their authority way beyond its original intention
with rules like MACT and CSAPR, the Clean Water Act is becoming a tool of overreach by the out of control agency.
Barack Obama and the EPA's Lisa Jackson have made it clear through their actions that they will circumvent the
legislature by using regulatory enforcement to enact Obama's green dreams, and now it seems that circumvention
includes the Supreme Court of the United States.

Top 10 Most Needed Government Reforms.
[#5] Reduce regulations: America is drowning in red tape, which is choking the entrepreneurial spirit
of small businesses and hampering job creation. The best way to get the economy moving again is to relieve the
regulatory burden dumped on the private sector by overbearing federal bureaucrats. Do we really need the
Environmental Protection Agency to start regulating workplace dust?

Washington
doesn't need to regulate rain. If the Supreme Court declines to review it, a recent ruling from
the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco will put federal courts into the business of managing
every acre of privately owned timberland in America. Farmers beware. You could be next. In
May, the 9th Circuit determined that rainwater draining from forest roads into local streams, rivers and lakes
is "point source pollution." As such, it must be regulated in the same way effluent from sewage-treatment
plants is regulated. To make a long story short, rainwater that accumulates alongside logging roads has
become a new target of environmental litigators. Several lawsuits were filed within days of the 9th Circuit's
decision.

EPA Fracking
Report and Energy Politics. Yesterday's EPA report raising water pollution worries about fracking in
Wyoming amounts to psy-ops in the Obama re-election campaign. ... The electorate is coming to realize that there
are a lot of new hydrocarbon resources out there in the American interior and offshore. Even the New York
Times has noted the oil boom in North Dakota, poster child for the New American Prosperity that lies ahead if we
vigorously pursue the energy opportunities that lie ahead. Energy independence is in prospect, and that alone
would change the strategic dynamics of world politics, and weaken many of our overseas antagonists. Oil prices
could actually drop substantially if the worldwide potential of oil sands, shale, and fracking of natural gas is
developed. The biggest game changer of all is the bounty of clean-burning natural gas unlocked by fracking,
with which America is particularly well-endowed. The only way Obama can defend his energy policies is to raise
fears of pollution.

More
unsupported hysteria over fracking. Fracking was first used in Oklahoma in the 1940s and
in the years since has been employed in more than a million oil and gas wells across the nation. There
is not a single independently documented instance of groundwater contamination by fracking anywhere in the
country, a fact that was confirmed as recently as May by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator
Lisa Jackson during congressional testimony. So why did the EPA announce Thursday [12/8/2011] in a draft
report that chemicals "likely" associated with fracking were found at a drilling site near Pavilion, Wyoming?

Environmental
Protection Agency adds Wise, Hood counties to DFW ozone-nonattainment area. The Environmental
Protection Agency has informed Texas officials that it plans to add Wise and Hood counties to the Dallas-Fort Worth
nonattainment area that has failed to meet federal ozone standards, with Barnett Shale natural gas operations
cited as a major factor in increasing air pollution in the counties. ... The EPA provided a document Friday [12/9/2011]
to the Star-Telegram showing that emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
from Barnett Shale natural gas and oil operations helped it decide about Hood and Wise.

The Editor says...
Nitrous Oxide (NO2) can't be all that bad. Dentists have used it for years. NO2 is used in dentistry and
medicine in a concentration of 30 to 50 percent, apparently with no ill
effects.*
The EPA standard for airborne NO2 is 53 parts per billion,
or 0.0000053 percent.*
Clearly, the EPA is straining at a gnat, to use a Biblical expression. Something tells me that "volatile
organic compounds" — whatever that means — are probably just as harmless. The EPA
has obviously run out of meaningful things to do, and is now going about the country helping President Obama
choke the life out of America's energy sources.

Where is the evidence
for EPA's claims? [By implementing the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule,] EPA claims it will "protect
hundreds of millions of Americans, providing up to $280 billion in benefits by preventing tens of thousands of
premature deaths, asthma and heart attacks, and millions of lost days of school or work due to illness," because
of the cleanup of mercury, sulfur and nitrogen oxides, and other emissions. Exactly where did the EPA come up
with these incredible health benefits?

API blasts EPA
report on hydraulic fracturing. Wyoming Gov. Matt Mead and state regulators have raised questions
about some of the water samples drawn at EPA's deep test wells in Pavillion, Wyo., after some of the results
could not be replicated. Industry and Wyoming officials also have questioned whether the EPA may have
introduced contaminants when it drilled those test wells.

Industry:
What happens in Wyoming doesn't happen in Texas. Oil and gas industry leaders are pushing back today
against an EPA draft report that linked hydraulic fracturing with water contamination in Wyoming by insisting that
what happened in that state is light years away from drilling being done in Texas, New York and other parts of the
country.

The EPA's Fracking Scare.
The shale gas boom has been a rare bright spot in the U.S. economy, so much of the country let out a shudder
two weeks ago when the Environmental Protection Agency issued a "draft" report that the drilling process of
hydraulic fracturing may have contaminated ground water in Pavillion, Wyoming. The good news is that
the study is neither definitive nor applicable to the rest of the country.

EPA
Ponders Expanded Regulatory Power In Name of 'Sustainable Development'. The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency wants to change how it analyzes problems and makes decisions, in a way that would give it
vastly expanded power to regulate businesses, communities and ecosystems in the name of "sustainable
development," the centerpiece of a global United Nations conference slated for Rio de Janeiro next June.

The EPA vs.
Private Property: The Fifth Amendment states that "No person shall be... deprived of life, liberty
or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just
compensation." But the EPA wants to issue compliance orders without its subjects being able to retaliate
via judicial review. And now a couple trying to build a home on their private property are being issued
fines and orders left and right. They can't challenge the EPA without the EPA's permission-even if the
original compliance order was issued in error.

Will the Supreme Court
stop the EPA? Mike and Chantell Sackett thought that they had achieved the American dream of not
just owning their own home, but building one themselves. They bought a parcel of land zoned for residential
construction in Idaho that was slightly larger than a half-acre and began construction on the house. The
EPA stopped them from proceeding by informing the Sacketts that their land was considered federally-protected
wetlands, and that not only would they have to cease construction, they were required to return the land to the
same condition as they had found it. Each day that they failed to do so, the EPA could fine
them $32,500.

The Editor says...Wetlands is a bureaucratic way to say swamp. Any construction on privately-owned swamp land
is an improvement. This action by the EPA is about control, not about protecting the environment.
To reiterate my opinion, if I may, the EPA has run out of useful things to do and must be abolished.

The EPA's Unconscionable
War on Fracking. The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution guarantees that "no person shall be ... deprived
of life, liberty, or property without due process of law." For government to harm investors in a private business by
bringing false charges against that business is most certainly a violation of the Fifth Amendment. The Environmental
Protection Agency, it seems, has been engaged in just this sort of unconstitutional activity ever since Obama appointed
Lisa Jackson as director.

Fracking
firm calls EPA move a threat to whole industry. Many in the oil and gas business, as well as the larger
business community, fear that the Obama administration is so fundamentally opposed to domestic drilling that the results
of the EPA study are already foregone conclusions. A highly critical report from the agency likely would stir greater
opposition to fracking and could deal a major blow to one of the few economic success stories of the past few years.

The EPA's
Mercury Madness. The EPA thinks it's worth spending billions of dollars each year to reduce
already minuscule amounts of mercury in the outside air. So why is it trying to shove mercury-laced
fluorescent bulbs into everyone's homes?

The
Government Grinches That Stole Christmas. Led by Administrator Lisa Jackson, the EPA has been on
an aggressive regulation push this year with rewriting air quality codes and using sustainability as argument
to leverage control over business. In Texas alone new EPA rules have cost the state thousands of jobs
and have halted in some cases energy production which increases the cost of gasoline. Nationwide the
cost of compliance with the new EPA regulations to businesses will be in the hundreds of billions.

MF
Global chief missing $1.2B is financial adviser to EPA. During two days of recent congressional
hearings into how as much as $1.2 billion disappeared from MF Global customer accounts, the chief operating
officer of the imploding investment firm responded again and again that he did not know. Yet as the House
and Senate interrogated Bradley I. Abelow and other top executives at MF Global Holdings Ltd.,
lawmakers did not mention Mr. Abelow's role as a financial adviser for the Environmental Protection Agency,
which as of Tuesday [12/27/2011] listed him as the chairman of its financial advisory board.

Greens
Target Pro-Life Evangelicals with EPA Propaganda Blitz. [The Evangelical Environmental Network]
announced it had just completed a quarter-million-dollar radio, television, and billboard advertising campaign
in nine states and the District of Columbia aimed at convincing evangelical and Catholic voters that supporting
the new EPA regulations is the "pro-life" position they should be urging their Senators and Congressmen to take.
Incredibly, the EEN ads bestow a "pro-life" label on politicians with a voting record 100 percent in favor
of abortion — because they support the new mercury regulations.

The EPA's
Global Warming Regulation Plans. In 1999, several groups of environmental activists sued the EPA
to force the agency regulate CO2 from motor vehicles. Eventually the case made it to the Supreme Court;
in April 2007 the Court ruled that carbon dioxide and five other GHGs are pollutants and can be regulated under
the [Clean Air Act]. ... In July 2008, the EPA released its 564-page Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR),
which details the types of businesses and entities that would potentially be affected by broadening the scope of
the CAA. Schools, farms, restaurants, hospitals, apartment complexes, churches, and anything with a
motor — from motor vehicles to lawnmowers, jet skis, and leaf blowers — could be subject
to regulations.

Small
Business Impact of the EPA Endangerment Finding. While Congress continues to debate the merits of
climate change legislation, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been steadily moving forward with a
process to regulate greenhouse gases (GHGs) under the ill-suited framework of the Clean Air Act (CAA). On
January 14 [2010], the first major step of that process — a final rule concluding that GHGs endanger
public health and welfare — took effect, and with it the obligation to move forward with what could easily
become the most expensive and intrusive set of regulations in history.

Labor unions double-crossed by the White House:Obama gives coal workers the shaft.
The leader of the United Mine Workers of Americas, the continent's largest coal workers union, December 21
denounced the President and the EPA on the day the agency issued its new Mercury and Air Toxics Standards
rule. [...] The union leader's tone was a sharp contrast from his full-throated 2008 support of candidate
Barack H. Obama Jr., when he said, "Obama's election will mean a new day for American coal miners and all
working families throughout our nation."

Supreme
Court case involving Idaho lake house ignites conservative cause against EPA. This month, the
Supreme Court will review the Sacketts' four-year-long effort to build on land that the EPA says contains
environmentally sensitive wetlands. A decision in the couple's favor could curtail the EPA's authority
and mean a fundamental change in the way the agency enforces the Clean Water Act. Even before the court
takes up the case, the couple have become a favored cause for developers, corporations, utilities, libertarians
and conservative members of Congress, who condemn what one ally told the court is the EPA's "abominable
bureaucratic abuse."

California
Truckers Take EPA to Court Over Emissions Rules. For the first time, the federal government
is regulating big-rigs, RV's, and tractor-trailers in much the same way it's held car makers to rigorous
fuel efficiency standards for decades. But a group of California truckers contends the regulations
will drive them right out of business — and has filed suit to block them.

Obama's Fascist
America in 10 Easy Steps. Writing back in 2007, Naomi Wolfe catalogued the steps to creating a
dictatorship (which she sought to apply to George W. Bush). Interestingly enough, they apply far more
to the man who replaced him. Wolfe's steps include: [#1] Invoke a terrifying internal and external
enemy. ... Isn't that what the EPA is doing with its endangerment finding — claiming that carbon dioxide
emitted by industry is going to cause catastrophic climate change?

EPA
reach too far? The Supreme Court on Monday [1/9/2012] heard arguments in a case that sounds small
but could have huge implications for property owners, corporations and federal regulations. Some of the
justices were clearly critical of the Environmental Protection Agency, calling its actions in the case heavy
handed. The justices were considering whether to let an Idaho couple challenge an EPA order identifying
their 0.63-acre lot as "protected wetlands."

The EPA searches desperately for a reason to exist:EPA
Ponders Expanded Regulatory Power In Name of 'Sustainable Development'. At the time that the "Green
Book" study was commissioned, in August, 2010, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson termed it "the next phase of
environmental protection," and asserted that it will be "fundamental to the future of the EPA." Jackson
compared the new approach, it would articulate to "the difference between treating disease and pursuing wellness."
It was, she said, "a new opportunity to show how environmentally protective and sustainable we can be," and
would affect "every aspect" of EPA's work.

Obama:
EPA Regulations Create Jobs. In a speech to employees of the Environmental Protection Agency on
Tuesday [1/10/2012], President Barack Obama said that EPA regulations are good for the economy and create jobs
and that the agency "touches" the lives of every American every day. "We can make sure that we are doing
right by our environment and, in fact, putting people back to work all across America," Obama told the federal
workers.

Obama Thanks EPA
For 'Historic Progress'. In an apparent attempt to shore up support from environmentalists ahead
of the presidential election, President Barack Obama made a trip to the Environmental Protection Agency to thank
employees for what he said was the "historic progress" they've made in protecting the environment. "You
protect the environment not just for our children but their children, and keep us moving toward energy
independence," Mr. Obama said in a speech to about 200 employees at the EPA's headquarters in D.C.

A
Fine for Not Using a Biofuel That Doesn't Exist. When the companies that supply motor fuel close the
books on 2011, they will pay about $6.8 million in penalties to the Treasury because they failed to mix a
special type of biofuel into their gasoline and diesel as required by law. But there was none to be had.
Outside a handful of laboratories and workshops, the ingredient, cellulosic biofuel, does not exist.

Moisturizing the EPA.
The Sacketts had purchased a small lot in Priest Lake, Idaho, to build their home. The lot was in a
residential area and they obtained all the necessary permits, graded the lot, and dumped gravel for the
foundation. Then the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) suddenly declared their lot a federally
protected wetland under the Clean Water Act, and told the Sacketts they must restore it to pristine condition or
face a fine of $37,500 per day. They were told they could not appeal until they had exhausted
all administrative remedies.

Senators
warn new EPA rules would raise gas prices. Senators from both sides of the aisle are warning that
looming EPA regulations on gasoline could impose billions of dollars in additional costs on the industry and
end up adding up to 25 cents to every gallon of gas. The senators, in a letter this week to
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, urged the agency to back off the yet-to-be-released regulations. Though
the EPA has not yet issued any proposal, they claimed the agency is planning to call for a new requirement to
reduce the sulfur content in gasoline.

How Obama
Betrays Martin Luther's King's Dream. [Scroll down] Lisa Jackson was chosen by Obama to be
the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. Since assuming office she has been reckless in
her war on carbon and in the wake is leaving job losses, slow growth and an uncertain electric energy supply.
She has been accused of exceeding the bounds of her regulatory authority to such an extent that businesses are
paralyzed by uncertainty — unsure of what she will unleash next. She is blithely unconcerned that Congressmen
have taken her to task for performance. Was she chosen for the color of her skin or the content of her
character?

Mark Levin: You
Cannot Have This EPA and a Constitution. "The purpose of the Constitution is to have a limited
central government where the sovereignty remains with the individual and the people and the states," said
Levin. "The purpose of utopianism is the opposite of all that. It's a relative handful of
masterminds and their massive army of bureaucrats and their experts advising them from the colleges and so
forth on how to run society. "You cannot have an EPA and a Constitution at the same time doing what this
EPA is doing," Levin told CNSNews.com. "You cannot have an NLRB deciding who gets to work where, how,
and when, and at the same time follow the Constitution," he said.

Where will
Obama side on mud puddles? For 35 years, the Environmental Protection Agency has understood
silviculture — the act of harvesting trees, as opposed to processing them — to be an
agricultural activity, not a manufacturing one. The distinction is vital because of particulars in the
Clean Water Act. Runoff from "point-source" manufacturing facilities (including saw mills) is closely
regulated. Permits are required, and an involved monitoring and remediation process is prescribed.
On the other hand, the "natural runoff" from forest roads — basically mud puddles that accumulate in
ditches — has never required such permits or monitoring. It is cared for through what is known
as "best management practices." But in the case Georgia-Pacific West Inc. v. Northwest Environmental
Defense Center, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals turned this long-standing rule on its head.

Obama-EPA Moving Quietly to Impose Gas Tax.
Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.) Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, commented on the
Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) plan to propose a Tier 3 rule on vehicles in March and finalize it in October.
These Tier 3 standards will cause gasoline prices to rise up to 25 cents a gallon.

EPA Misrepresents Benefits of
Ozone Restrictions. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is overstating the benefits of new
rules to further tighten ambient air quality standards regarding ozone, according to a study by NERA Economic
Consulting. EPA's statements about its proposal to cut ground-level ozone "grossly misrepresent what EPA is
actually estimating as the potential benefits of reducing public exposures to ozone," according to the report.

Kentucky's Leading Democrat Takes
on Obama's EPA. Democratic Gov. Steve Beshear has sent a letter to President Barack Obama expressing
frustration with the adverse impact of Environmental Protection Agency regulations on Kentucky miners' ability
to produce coal. "Kentucky has experienced tremendous frustration over the uncertainty and overreaching
policies of the EPA surrounding the Clean Water Act," Beshear wrote, noting an eight-month period of negotiations
that saw dozens of coal mining permit applications placed on federal hold ended on a sour note.

EPA Proposes a Ban on Rat and
Mouse Poisons. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has announced plans to ban 20 rat and mouse
control products because they use loose bait. The products are especially dangerous, EPA claims, because
they are sold for use in homes where unsupervised children or pets may come into contact with them.

A Look Inside EPA's Assault
on Common Sense: Forty years ago there was a pressing need for an organization to gather environmental
data and distribute it to the states and the public. EPA filled that role beautifully, raising the nation's
environmental awareness. Unfortunately, the agency asserted incrementally more power and has unnecessarily
strangled innovation and economic output with overly burdensome, often unjustified environmental regulations.
EPA has become one of the biggest obstacles to economic growth and job creation in the United States, and [Richard]
Trzupek explains exactly how this came to be.

Coming
soon: Individual mandate to buy Chevy Volts. The CAFE rule is the fleet-wide average fuel economy
rating manufacturers are required by Washington to achieve. The new rule — issued in response
to a 2010 Obama directive, not to specific legislation passed by Congress — would require automakers
to achieve a 40.9 mpg CAFE average by 2021 and 54.5 mpg by 2025. In case you're wondering whatever
happened to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, it has been supplanted in the CAFE process by
the EPA. ... Total costs, as calculated by the EPA, will exceed $157 billion, making this by far the most
expensive CAFE rule ever.

EPA Messing With Texas.
A new report issued this week by the Texas Public Policy Foundation details the looming job killers the Feds have
in store for businesses everywhere. The report, titled The EPA's Approaching Regulatory Avalanche, finds that
specifically there are ten new rules currently in the pipeline from the EPA alone that could potentially cost the
U.S. economy hundreds of billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of jobs.

IER files comment on EPA's proposed light-duty rule.
The Institute for Energy Research filed a comment yesterday [2/13/2012] with the Environmental Protection Agency regarding a
proposed rule to establish light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas emission standards. ... "By EPA's own estimates, this proposed
rule will only reduce global temperature at most by .018 of a degree by the year 2100. With such negligible climactic
benefits — if any at all — it is hard to understand why the federal government would push new regulations
that will effectively increase the cost of buying a car by thousands of dollars and push 7 million drivers out of the
market," noted IER President Tom Pyle.

Breaking down EPA's Light-Duty GHG Emission Standards.
EPA's proposed regulation:
• Would force 6 million drivers out of the market, according to one estimate.
• Would increase the price of a new car by thousands of dollars.
• Assumes that Americans are too dumb make good decisions about fuel economy, even when those mistakes add up
to billions of dollars per year.
• Is supposed to do something about global warming, but according to EPA itself the rule would, at most,
reduce global temperatures by 0.02°C. in the year 2100.

Obama
EPA Fuel Efficiency Standard Will Eliminate Half of U.S. New Car Buyers. In another attempt to circumvent the
market by political fiat, the Obama administration has positioned itself to force half of the new car buying population in
the country out of the market, which would seriously maim all three American car companies and cost millions of good jobs.
How can they do this? The Obama EPA is planning to enact their stunning 2025 EPA fleet fuel efficiency standard,
raising it from the already high 35.5 miles per gallon mark by 2016, to a whopping 54.5 miles per gallon,
according to Judson Berger's FOXNews article yesterday [2/15/2012].

EPA's Sustainability Gambit.
The EPA paid the National Academy of Science (NAS) $700,000 to determine how to integrate sustainability as one
of the key drivers within the regulatory responsibilities of the EPA. Adopting sustainability as a key
driver would have an enormous effect on how we develop and use our energy resources. The study is already
known as the "Green Book" within the EPA. The study did not, however, try to define sustainability,
which it should have, because there is no widely accepted definition of sustainability.

Like the Price of Gas?
Just Wait! Obama's controversial EPA chief, Lisa Jackson, has pushed through the agency a passel
of new regulations that will raise the cost of electricity dramatically over the next three years. ... Obama
himself forewarned us when he was running for office. As he said in January of 2008, "Under my plan of a
cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket."

Va. AG Cuccinelli:
'The EPA has violated the law here'. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia is
considering challenges this week to the Environmental Protection Agency's determination that carbon dioxide
and other greenhouse gases are pollutants and subject to federal regulation. In addition to suits on the
part of a number of companies and business groups, Virginia and 14 other states charge that the EPA violated
its own rules by using data from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), rather than
internal research, in order to make the initial greenhouse gas endangerment findings. The states also
charge that the EPA violated the law by failing to reopen hearings in light of new data.

The EPA's Property
Wrongs in America. The EPA said the Feds didn't have to explain their rationale to the Sacketts, and that the Sacketts
didn't even merit a day in court to defend the property they'd purchased. The Sacketts couldn't argue that the property wasn't
wetlands, as the EPA claimed, or that these wetlands and the lake itself had no connection to navigable waters, as "navigable
waters of the United States" means you can conduct commercial trade on the water from state to state. Why didn't they merit
their day in court? Because the EPA said so — saying they aren't entitled. ... The U.S. district and appellate courts have ruled
that the Sacketts must wait until the EPA decides to sue them — and can claim millions of dollars in fines — before
they can get a day in court.

EPA Endangers Human Health
and Welfare. The purpose of the original lawsuit, Commonwealth of Mass. vs EPA, was to force the EPA
to regulate CO2 as a pollutant from motor-vehicle tailpipe emissions. To overcome the problem of "standing,"
Massachusetts presented an affidavit written by the chief scientist of the Environmental Defense Fund, claiming
that putative future warming caused by the greenhouse gas CO2 would lead to extensive flooding of New England coastal
regions. There are three things wrong with this claim: one, there is no evidence that an increase in CO2 would
lead to appreciable warming; two, there is no evidence that any warming, should it occur, would accelerate ongoing
sea-level rise; and three, it would seem improper for the Supreme Court to accept an affidavit from an obviously
biased source. Unfortunately, the Department of Justice refused our technical help and did not adequately
argue the case.

Clearing the air on the EPA.
Rep. Joe Barton last week took the first official baby step in exposing the Environmental Protection Agency's corrupt
scientific advisory process. In his opening statement at last week's House Energy and Commerce hearing about the
EPA's 2013 budget, Mr. Barton of Texas came as close as any Republican ever has to reading EPA Director Lisa P.
Jackson the riot act about the agency's ever-increasing contempt for science, economics, Congress and even the
Constitution.

Natural Gasbags. In a marathon Thursday
[3/8/2012] session over a highway transportation bill, Senate Democrats blocked three energy amendments, killing
legislation to expand offshore oil drilling, push forward with the Keystone XL oil pipeline, and delay
EPA clean-air regulations. The Senate refused to delay Environmental Protection Agency's controversial
regulations on industrial boiler and furnace operators by a 52-46 vote. The amendment was introduced by
Maine Republican Susan Collins, which would have given the EPA 15 months to draft new "least burdensome"
rules on these operators.

The EPA's Alt-Fuels Tax. An oil and gas
trade group filed a lawsuit Monday [3/12/2012] challenging the Environmental Protection Agency's renewable fuel
regulations, saying the rules are unachievable and amount to a stealth tax on the industry. The American
Petroleum Institute has requested that the D.C. Circuit Court review the EPA's rules for cellulosic biofuel, a
renewable fuel source made out of plant material such as switch grass and woodchips. In a statement, API
Director of Downstream and Industry Operations Bob Greco said the EPA's mandate was "divorced from reality"
and "forces refiners to purchase credits for cellulosic fuels that do not exist."

Truck dealers
study says EPA regulations worthless, costly. The EPA published new rules in 1997, 2000 and 2001, targeting
trucks in model years 2004 through 2010; the study looks specifically at the 2000 and 2001 rules. The regulations
were "designed to reduce emissions of three diesel fuel combustion products," but instead prompted trucking companies
to creatively adapt to the rules, said the report, undermining the environmental goals.

Cheaper Gasoline Starts at the EPA.
One factor driving up the price is the impending closure of large Northeast refineries due to oppressive EPA regulations unilaterally
imposed by Lisa Jackson of Obama's EPA. Boutique blend requirements for different markets imposes extra costs on refineries and
make them less profitable. Want to drive gasoline prices down? Fire Lisa Jackson and impose a six-month moratorium on the
EPA regulations hamstringing the market.

Court Sides With Property Owners Over EPA. The Supreme Court has
sided with an Idaho couple in a property rights case, ruling they can go to court to challenge an Environmental Protection
Agency order that blocked construction of their new home and threatened fines of more than $30,000 a day. Wednesday's
[3/21/2012] decision is a victory for Mike and Chantell Sackett, whose property near a scenic lake has sat undisturbed since
the EPA ordered a halt in work in 2007.

US top court backs landowners in EPA
clean water case. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday [3/21/2012] that landowners may bring a civil lawsuit
challenging a federal government order under the clean water law, a decision that sides with corporate groups and sharply
curtails a key Environmental Protection Agency power.

The Case for Trimming the
EPA. Many of our environmental laws still command the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to eliminate pollution
without regard to economic or job costs. They put the EPA on autopilot churning out one rule after another without heed to
cost or competing values. Today in some (but not all) EPA rules, we spend huge sums chasing tiny risks that probably don't
actually exist and thereby kill jobs and steal from the poor.

Supreme
Court Ruling: Victory for Property Owners, Defeat for EPA. On March 21, Justice Antonin Scalia delivered the Court's
unanimous opinion, which has been hailed as a historic victory for property owners and a stinging rebuke to federal regulators.
The Court's decision does not end the EPA "wetlands" nightmare for the Sacketts; it merely rules that the EPA goblin may not continue
terrorizing them with threats of financial ruin while denying the Sacketts their "due process" right to challenge the agency's
compliance order in court.

Court backs Idaho couple in battle
with EPA. An Idaho couple facing ruinous fines for attempting to build a home on private property that the federal
government considered protected wetlands may challenge an order from the Environmental Protection Agency, the Supreme Court ruled
Wednesday [3/21/2012] in a unanimous decision. The case was considered the most significant property rights case on the high
court's docket this year, with the potential to change the balance of power between landowners and the EPA in disputes over land use,
development and the enforcement of environmental regulations.

Ending EPA's land grab.
Federal agencies are out of control. The grant of virtually unlimited power with no accountability has gone to the heads of
some unelected bureaucrats, and nowhere is that more true than at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Even the Supreme
Court has had enough. All nine justices agreed Wednesday that the agency has finally gone too far.

Pipeline ruling filled with
politics. From all appearances, the Keystone XL pipeline was on track after the State Department's approval.
But the project hit a major snag in July 2010, when the Environmental Protection Agency overstepped its authority and claimed the
State Department's analysis was faulty because it didn't consider oil-spill response plans, safety issues and greenhouse gas emissions.

Holding the EPA to Account.
[Scroll down] Most environmental protection is done at the state-level. Most environmental regulatory work is done by
the states. The Federal agency has too much time and money and that results in overreach and aggressive policy making.

Taming the EPA monster.
On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court slapped the monster right across the chops in Sackett v. EPA. An Idaho
couple, Chantell and Mike Sackett, were building a home but fell victim to an EPA compliance order in 2005. Their
building permit was revoked after the EPA charged that they had violated the Clean Water Act by filling in their lot
with rocks and dirt.

The Next Step for the Sacketts.
"We went to the county and paid our fees, got a building permit, and went through the checklist," Mike remembers. "Then the
EPA shows up." The Environmental Protection Agency claimed that building on the land would violate the Clean Water Act, which
makes it illegal to discharge "any pollutant" into "navigable waters" without a permit. While the Sacketts' land contains no
waters that are "navigable-in-fact," as the legal jargon has it, the EPA has defined "navigable waters" to include wetlands that
are adjacent to actual navigable waters such as Priest Lake.

The Editor says...
Look up the word navigable in your dictionary. (You do have a dictionary, right? I'm referring to a dictionary in
the form a dusty old book, as opposed to Wikipedia, which can be changed at any time by anybody.) I'll help you out by scanning mine.
It is not possible to sail a boat or a ship in a swamp or bog, and whether or not a nearby body of water is navigable is irrelevant and immaterial.
"Wetland" is the fashionable new name for a swamp, and as far as I can determine, wetland was not in any dictionary prior to 1952
at the earliest.

Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Fifth Edition, 1939.

Fixing the EPA.
The Environmental Protection Agency wants to reinterpret the Clean Water Act; according to Congressman Bill Shuster,
its new interpretation will "open the door for the federal government to regulate just about any place where water
collects." Till now, the EPA has been able to impose itself only on "navigable waterways." The EPA
wants to drop the word "navigable."

The Gas Price Kerfuffle: Obama's
Achilles Heel? [Scroll down] Further, the EPA's 2012 Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) causes refineries to pay millions
of dollars for cellulosic ethanol waivers — with the cost passed on to motorists. But there is no commercial production
of cellulosic biofuels. The American Petroleum Institute has sued the EPA over such unachievable use requirements, filing a
petition for review on March 12 in the U.S. Appeals Court for the District of Columbia. "EPA's standard is divorced from
reality and forces refiners to purchase credits for cellulosic fuels that do not exist," said API.

The EPA Wrecking Ball. The
Environmental Protection Agency is using its power to advance the objective of the environmental movement to
deny Americans access to the energy that sustains the nation's economy and is using the greatest hoax ever
perpetrated, global warming — now called "climate change" — to achieve that goal.

EPA Can't
Disapprove Texas Air-Quality Rules, Court Says. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency had "no legal basis"
to disapprove a Texas plan for implementing federal air-quality standards, a court said. The U.S. Court of Appeals in
New Orleans ordered the agency to reconsider the Texas regulations and "limit its review" to ensuring that they meet the
"minimal" Clean Air Act requirements that govern state implementation plans. "If Texas's regulations satisfy those
basic requirements, the EPA must approve them," the court said in its 22-page March 26 ruling.

The EPA's Unreliable Science.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) research on human heath effects of air pollution consistently violates the
rules of science and is not admissible in a federal court under the rules of Daubert v. Merrell Dow 509 U.S. 579
(1993). ... The whole EPA Air Pollution Regulatory Regime impacting industries and business and energy on small particles, ozone,
ozone precursors, mercury, lead, and other air pollutants is a scientific lie, inadmissible when properly challenged in a federal
court. The problem is data-torturing, which produces weak associations that don't prove anything.

Abrupt climate-change reversal.
The EPA's website features an Extreme Events page, which reads: "Human-induced climate change has the potential to alter the
prevalence and severity of extremes such as heat waves, cold waves, storms, floods and droughts." On the basis of that premise,
EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson last week announced plans to place crushing restrictions on the nation's coal-burning power
plants, on which Americans depend to produce 45 percent of the nation's electricity.

The EPA Abuses First,
Apologizes Later. Last summer, I wrote about the Environmental Protection Agency's shameful persecution of a Texas
natural-gas company, Range Resources Corp. The year before, EPA had slapped the company with an "emergency order" under the
Safe Drinking Water Act, alleging that it "caused or contributed to" the contamination of two water wells west of Fort Worth.
Almost immediately, however, EPA was forced to admit that Range had no connection whatsoever to the contamination in question.
It nonetheless insisted on the company's obedience to the original order.

An Update On The EPA's Den Of
Thieves. Last month we told you about the prime speaking spot that the EPA was affording to Ann Maest of
Stratus Consulting at this week's EPA Hard Rock Mining Conference. Dr. Maest and Stratus are being sued by
Chevron, under federal racketeering laws, after Maest was caught on video appearing to agree to doctor data in a
way that would exaggerate environmental damage and inflate multi-billion dollar damage claims in a long running
environmental case in Equador. After Wizbang and others publicized Maest's participation in the conference
she abruptly dropped off the program.

The EPA with Easter Egg on Its
Face. By spreading fear, the EPA justifies its existence — after all, there is a problem that it needs to solve.
It gains power without, as Justice Kennedy said, "a heavy burden of justification." The crazy regulations the EPA has been issuing represent
a breakdown in faith in the government. The EPA has been exposed as being abusive and arrogantly authoritative.

Attorneys
General Join Forces to Call Into Account Illegal Obama Administration Violations. [The State of Texas] filed lawsuit challenging
Cross-State Air Pollution Rules; application rule to TX was particularly dubious because state was included in the regulation at the last minute
and without an opportunity to respond to the proposed regulation; regulation was based on a dubious claim that air pollution from TX affected
a single air-quality monitor in Granite City, Illinois more than 500 miles and three states away from Texas.

Unelected EPA
Bureaucrats Approve E15 Ethanol. Last week, "an unelected group of people" over at the Environmental
Protection Agency revised our national energy policy, approving a new gasoline blend with up to 15% ethanol, known
as E15, which may be available in pumps this summer. Currently, most gasoline sold in the U.S. is E10, containing
a maximum of 10% ethanol.

Is the EPA Just Sloppy,
or Cooking the Books? After issuing a hastily compiled report last year claiming a direct link between groundwater
contamination and hydraulic fracturing at Pavillion, Wyoming, the EPA now admits that it may be wrong. Or, it may be, it
was intentionally cooking the books. The only question now is whether the findings in the draft report were purposefully
falsified so as to form the basis for national regulation of fracking, or whether they were just incredibly sloppy.
Either way, the EPA needs to be held to account.

EPA
Levies $438,000 in Fines on School Bus Contractor for 'Excessive Idling'. The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) enforced nearly $500,000 in fines and mandatory "environmental projects" on a school
bus contractor for "excessive idling," and as part of its anti-idling campaign to reduce the carbon footprint
of school buses waiting to pick up children for their routes. "As part of a settlement for alleged excessive
diesel idling in Connecticut, Massachusetts and Rhode Island, Durham School Services will commit to reduce idling
from its school bus fleet of 13,900 buses operating in 30 states," read an EPA press release on
Tuesday [4/10/2012].

Poisoning the Kids. As a measure
of the quality of air in our country, the U.S. EPA maintains data and statistics that quantify air quality from 1980 to
the present. Based on the U.S. EPA's own data, the national ambient air quality standards for certain target
pollutants have all steadily and dramatically reduced. As a national average:
• Carbon monoxide has been reduced 82%
• Ozone was reduced 28%
• Lead has been reduced 89%
• Nitrogen oxides have been reduced 52%
• Particulate matter as PM10 was reduced 38%, and fine particulate matter as PM 2.5 has been reduced 27%
• Sulfur dioxide has been reduced 83%
Regardless, according the Obama administration and its supporters, the quality of the air in our country is
literally killing our kids.

A Strategy to Stop EPA Science
Abuse. There is a way to stop the EPA's abuse of science and prevent their continued aggressive regulatory
activity that destroys the economy and causes harm to Americans. Primarily, we have to hold the EPA to good
scientific principles and stop the EPA's overreaching and panic-mongering. The method that will work is a
well-established judicial and legal demand for good scientific evidence as described in the Daubert supreme
court opinion, explained in the book by the Federal Judicial Center — the Reference Manual on Scientific
Evidence.

EPA
finalizes first-ever air pollution rules for natural-gas 'fracking'. The Environmental Protection Agency
unveiled first-ever regulations Wednesday [4/18/2012] aimed at reducing toxic air pollution from the natural-gas drilling
practice known as "fracking." The regulations — which would also target emissions from compressors, oil
storage tanks and other oil-and-gas sector equipment — would cut 95 percent of smog-forming and toxic
emissions from wells developed with fracking, EPA said.

House blocks EPA from banning lead in ammunition.
The House on Tuesday [4/17/2012] passed legislation giving hunters and fishing enthusiasts access to certain public
lands to pursue their sport and also blocked the Environmental Protection Agency from banning lead for use in ammunition
and fishing tackle. The Sportsmen's Heritage Act passed on a mostly party line vote of 274 yeas and 146 nays.

The EPA's Faulty
Science Can Be Stopped. United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-sponsored and funded
"human health effects science" research is unreliable and makes irresponsible and outrageous claims about how
air pollution causes thousands of deaths. Then the EPA claims that it can prevent those deaths with its
latest set of regulations of emissions. This junk science can be challenged effectively, legally, and
politically, as described [in this article].

Obama's
Secretive Keystone XL Decision. Started in 1970 by President Richard Nixon, the EPA was a small
agency that combined several anti-pollution and clean water agencies into one agency with 4,084 employees and
a $1 billion budget. Today, it has 17,000 employees and has evolved from its narrow focus into an
unconstitutional, blunt instrument with vast powers that the Obama Administration wields to promote a radical
political agenda that is destroying prosperity and ruining lives.

More fracking red tape. The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) on Wednesday [4/18/2012] finalized 588 pages of new restrictions on the production of natural gas and oil that
take primary aim at hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," a drilling technique that releases trapped natural gas from underground shale.
Gas producers will be required to install equipment on about 13,000 new natural gas wells and around 1,200 old ones to prevent released gas
from escaping into the atmosphere, where the agency says it contributes to "greenhouse" gases. Humans and animals release the same
vilified gases merely by being alive.

Obama
EPA Rushes to Impose New Ethanol Mandate. Oral arguments began last week on another controversial Obama Administration
policy. It's not Obamacare in the Supreme Court, but the outcome will affect a major sector of the economy: energy. In
particular, the fuel most Americans use daily.

The Search for the 100-MPG Car.
Recently the EPA was caught trying to suppress a report that the U.S. power grid might not be able to withstand the new
"pollution" standards without triggering rolling blackouts. What the report does not mention is that adding a major demand
of 11 million new electrical appliances, called electric cars, will very likely collapse the grid. But not to
worry: no one wants to buy the "premier" electric vehicle, the Chevy Volt, since it is prone to spontaneous
combustion.

Appointees
show what Obama is. In the EPA's case, when they condemned fracturing to obtain gas from shale as harmful to ground water
they have to date no evidence to sustain that claim other than the ravings of another bunch of out-of-control environmentalists.
The EPA administrator, Lisa Jackson, publicly stated that fact when interviewed by the press regarding the regional director's outrageous
remarks.

Obama
Is a Big-Time Law Violator. In Florida, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) imposed its own unscientific "numeric
nutrient" criteria, which would cost billions of dollars for compliance and the loss of thousands of jobs. A federal court found
that EPA had violated the law because its rules were not based on sound science and because EPA failed to prove that its rules would
prevent harm to the environment.

Top 10 misguided energy policies. [#6] War on coal: The Obama
Environmental Protection Agency is waging a war on coal, slowing the permitting process to a crawl and issuing crippling regulations.
Candidate Obama signaled as much in 2008, when he said: "When I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, under my plan of a cap-and-trade
system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket."

Ohio Congressman: EPA Rules Crippling my State.
Despite Vice President Joe Biden's touting of the Obama administration's record on manufacturing in Ohio on Thursday [5/17/2012], the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency is moving to cripple the energy business in the state, Rep. Bill Johnson told Newsmax TV. "The EPA is actually trying to shut down
steel manufacturing in America," the Ohio Republican said.

Gay Marriage: The Hidden Agenda. It is the
iron law of "progressive" movements that having achieved their goals, they refuse to fade away. Rather than disbanding upon completion of
their mission, these movements, now fully institutionalized, keep chugging along, and the farther they go, the more they resemble their sworn
enemies, the rationale for their existence.

Obama's EPA urges more red tape.
Right now, in the Pacific Northwest, the private sector is ready to put shovels in the ground and more than double the nation's
coal exports. Coal output in the Powder River Basin in Wyoming and Montana is increasing, and companies are trying to
build export terminals to link increased domestic supply with burgeoning demand for electricity generation in China. This
is the way the global energy market is supposed to work, and American workers and the economy will benefit when abundant American
coal is sold to overseas buyers. That is, only if the federal government will let it happen.

EPA Celebrates the 'Crushing' of
One Million Working Refrigerators. In a move that recalls the government venture that pulverized 700,000 used cars under
the "cash for clunkers" program, the Environmental Protection Agency is now praising a company for "crushing its 1 millionth
refrigerator." EPA hailed Southern California Edison (SCE), a partner in its Responsible Appliance Disposal (RAD) Program,
for reaching the "national conservation milestone."

Coal industry video
slams 'frustrating' EPA, backs up Romney energy speech. The coal industry is hitting back against attacks on
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who highlighted the Obama administration's energy policies during a campaign
stop in Colorado. Those policies, he said, are hostile toward coal. A video released Friday [6/1/2012] by America's
Power, a coal industry-funded advocacy group, focused on the towns of Nucla and Naturita, Colo., where proposed regulations
from the Environmental Protection Agency threaten to close a coal mine and a coal plant. The regulations cover mercury
emissions and other pollutant standards.

EPA told to come clean on feedlot flyovers.
A spy in the sky over Nebraska and Iowa has gotten under the hides of some livestock producers and their representatives in
Washington. The Environmental Protection Agency's aerial photo surveillance of livestock feeding operations in both
states flew under the radar for nearly two years. But now the flyover program, conducted to help enforce the Clean
Water Act, has prompted a demand for answers from all five members of Nebraska's congressional delegation.

Nebraska
lawmakers question EPA's aerial livestock surveillance. A bipartisan group of Capitol Hill lawmakers is pressing
EPA Director Lisa Jackson to answer questions about privacy issues and other concerns after the agency used aerial surveillance
to monitor livestock operations over their home state of Nebraska.

The Editor says...
If the EPA is doing the work of the USDA, why do we need both?

EPA's Unethical Air Pollution
Experiments. The people at the EPA claim that they must control air pollution to prevent the deaths of thousands.
Then they expose human subjects to high levels of air pollution. Is it possible that they are lying, or unethical, or both? [...] The
only way out for the EPA in this episode is to acknowledge the reality that ambient levels or even higher levels of PM2.5 are not toxic or
lethal, based on their own research, and to admit that their claims of thousands of lives lost from small particles is nonsense.

An Eco-Fascist
Gassing Experiment with Diesel Fumes at the EPA. It has been recently revealed that the EPA has far surpassed the
dark humor of blowing up kids and people on film that global warming scare-mongers promoted a few years back. In real life,
the EPA has been conducting human experiments on people by piping diesel fumes from a running truck mixed with air into their
lungs at a North Carolina university. The agency has ginned up yet another green crusade — the lethal dangers of
diesel fumes. They even had a gas chamber set up to accommodate the environmental research project that shockingly recalls
the death camps in Poland.

EPA's illegal human
experiments. Based on thousands of pages of documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, since
2004 and continuing through the Obama administration, the EPA intentionally has been exposing dozens, if not hundreds, of
human subjects to extraordinarily high levels of air pollutants such as diesel exhaust and fine particulate matter, known
as PM2.5. The experiments occurred at an EPA facility located on the campus of the University of North Carolina School
of Medicine.

Did EPA
Illegally Experiment On Human Beings? The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has been sued in federal court for conducting
illegal experiments on human beings. A federal judge will now determine whether the EPA has violated federal law and the most
sacrosanct moral standards of scientific research or whether the EPA has been lying to Congress and the public about the dangers of
air pollution.

18 months later, the Daily Caller reports the same story.Report:
EPA tested deadly pollutants on humans to push Obama admin's agenda. The Environmental Protection
Agency has been conducting dangerous experiments on humans over the past few years in order to justify more
onerous clean air regulations. The agency conducted tests on people with health issues and the elderly,
exposing them to high levels of potentially lethal pollutants, without disclosing the risks of cancer and death,
according to a newly released government report. These experiments exposed people, including those with
asthma and heart problems, to dangerously high levels of toxic pollutants, including diesel fumes, reads a EPA
inspector general report obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation. The EPA also exposed people with
health issues to levels of pollutants up to 50 times greater than the agency says is safe for humans.

EPA
Conducted Pollution Experiments on Children. The Environmental Protection Agency is under fire for
exposing children to pollution as part of an experiment at the University of Southern California. This
information is coming to light from the website junkscience.com after an investigation from the EPA's Office
of the Inspector General stated in a recent report that the EPA's pollution experiments on older people, done
at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, were more harmful to the subjects than what the EPA presented.
The IG also said that while the experiment's subjects did consent to exposure, the "risks were not always
consistently represented."

When Eco-Thugs Knock: Larry Keller is a
patriot, who responded to a pompous EPA eco-thug. For that he was threatened with intimidating representatives sent at the
behest of Lisa Jackson, administrator of Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA under Jackson has become Stalinist. [...] During
the past four decades the EPA has morphed into bureaucracy that directly employs 12,000 people, and sucks up a budget of nearly
$10 billion annually. Its goals have nothing to do with clean air or clean water — instead the EPA is on a
regulatory conquest to vanquish personal property rights, diminish capitalism, alter consumption patterns, and recast the American
lifestyle.

Obama
Administration Over-Regulating Farms Out of Business. The Obama administration is no friend of farmers, and the recent
stunt involving the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sending spy planes over the state of Nebraska to keep an eye on where cows
drop their patties is the latest example of overreach by an administration that is bent on controlling every aspect of our lives, but
farming in particular.

Send In The Drones: Obama
Spies On America. News the EPA is conducting surveillance on farmers goes against our grain. Freedom means
freedom of movement and the presumption of innocence. How can we have it if every move is monitored by government?
Nebraska's congressional delegation sent a justifiably angry letter to Administrator Lisa Jackson last week complaining that her
Environmental Protection Agency had exceeded its legislative and constitutional authority by conducting drone surveillance flights
over Nebraska and Iowa farms looking for violations of the Clean Water Act.

"Never in the history of the CWA has federal regulation defined ditches and
other upland features as 'waters of the United States.'"EPA power grab to regulate
ditches, gullies on private property. Lawmakers are working to block an unprecedented power grab by the Environmental Protection
Agency to use the Clean Water Act (CWA) and control land alongside ditches, gullies and other ephemeral spots by claiming the sources are part
of navigable waterways. These temporary water sources are often created by rain or snowmelt, and would make it harder for private property
owners to build in their own backyards, grow crops, raise livestock and conduct other activities on their own land, lawmakers say.

Blogger Busts EPA's Fake Fuel Figures. Blogger
Lindsay Leveen at Green Explored explains, in layman's terms, how the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has created data "that disobey the laws of thermodynamics
so that the worthless government policy of favoring plug in vehicles over gas or diesel powered vehicles can be supported by the public." The key, according to
Leveen, is that the EPA deliberately ignores energy losses at each stage of the electrical process — meaning that the EPA's claim of 118 miles per
gallon (MPG) for the Honda Fit means less than 41 MPG in reality.

Congress calls out the EPA. One group in Congress which doesn't get
nearly enough attention in the media is the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology and, in particular, the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment.
Their chairman, Andy Harris (R-MD) sent a letter to the EPA this week which was probably long overdue. In it, he calls on EPA chair Lisa Jackson to explain
what he identifies as a very disturbing pattern of behavior when it comes to natural gas drilling and the agency's somewhat "casual" approach to science.

Lisa Jackson: EPA isn't to blame for coal industry's
problems. Is this some sort of inept, tasteless joke? Try to read around the relentless environmental bias and feel-good blather of this glowing
profile of EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson from the Guardian, and you'll recognize the same sort of economic-language usage employed by the wider Obama administration
to try and disguise their many endeavors at central planning.

Congressional hearing exposed EPA failures. [Scroll down] Mayor
Jean of Rochester gave a superb, focused testimony, including important facts and figures. He testified that the EPA proceeded with haste, a lack of
good scientific background, and was oblivious of the cost to the residents of their imposed regulations. Mayor Jean indicated that, if Rochester would
be forced to comply, the average annual sewer costs for the average Rochester property owner would increase from $600 to $1,200 per year.

Senator opens inquiry into
EPA's armed visit to NC man's home. An Asheville, N.C. man has enlisted the aid of North Carolina Republican Sen. Richard
Burr to investigate a visit he received from two armed Environmental Protection Agency officials and a local police officer. Burr
has been in touch with the man and started an inquiry into the incident with EPA.

EPA's scary-air sniffers. Americans on their
way to work or school may soon be reaching for a new high-tech device as they head out the door — a personal air-quality monitor.
That's the vision of bureaucrats at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) who are trying to develop a portable sniffer that measures the body's
reactions to pollution in the air. It's bound to take fear-mongering to a new level.

Industry
groups: Administration overestimating emissions at 'fracking' sites. The amount of methane released from hydraulic fracturing, or
fracking, is half what the Obama administration estimates, according to a study released Monday [6/4/2012] by the American Petroleum Institute and the America's
Natural Gas Alliance. Howard Feldman, API's director of Regulatory and Scientific Affairs told reporters on a conference call that the study
"provides the best, most comprehensive estimate of methane emissions from U.S. natural gas production. It's based on data from ten times as
many wells as support the estimate EPA has been using."

EPA Proposes Stricter New
Standards for Soot Pollution. Adding to the Obama administration's mounting heap of regulations, the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) proposed Friday [6/15/2012] new air quality standards to curb the purportedly fatal repercussions of soot emissions. In reducing the emission of such
particles, which environmentalists say are one of the most hazardous air pollutants, oil refiners and large manufacturers will be forced to invest in
costly pollution-reduction upgrades.

Union demands
investigation into 'climate of fear,' alleged staff abuse at EPA. The Daily Caller has obtained an internal "report of violence
in the workplace" notifying top officials at the Environmental Protection Agency about the abusive behavior of a political appointee close to
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson. The report and call for an independent investigation and action highlights the behavior of Stephanie
Owens, an EPA deputy associate administrator in the Office of the Administrator's Office of External Affairs and Environmental Education.
It details a March 14 incident in which Owens, a political appointee, verbally attacked a bargaining unit employee to the point that
the union member was afraid to return to her office — for the second time in two weeks.

The Editor says...
Why does the Office of the Administrator have an Office of External Affairs and Environmental Education? Can't local school systems
make their own decisions about environmental education without pressure from federal bureaucrats?

RINO Alert!Senate kills effort
to block EPA regulations on coal-powered plants. Legislation to defeat an EPA emissions rule that critics say would kill
thousands of jobs and raise electricity rates for consumers was killed in the Senate Wednesday [6/20/2012]. A handful of
Republicans sided with Democrats to block the measure on a procedural vote of 46 yeas to 53 nays, including Sens. Lamar
Alexander of Tennessee, Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, Scott Brown of Massachusetts, and Susan Collins and Olympia Snow of Maine.

EPA Fines Refineries for Not Using Substance That Does Not Exist. One of the countless
requirements the Environmental Protection Agency hobbles the economy by inflicting is the use of cellulosic ethanol by the millions of gallons
when refining oil. This flaky green rule, no doubt imposed to ease the imaginary plight of man-eating polar bears, is particularly onerous
because cellulosic ethanol is a theoretical substance that does not exist.

EPA fines oil
refiners for failing to use nonexistent biofuel. Do you fill your car's tank with gasoline that is part cellulosic ethanol,
an environment-friendly distillate of wood chips, corn cobs, and switch grass? Let me answer for you: No, you don't. You
couldn't if you wanted to. Petroleum products blended with cellulosic ethanol aren't commercially available, because the technology
for mass-producing cellulosic ethanol hasn't been perfected. None of which has stopped the Environmental Protection Agency from
imposing hefty yearly fines on oil refiners.

Can EPA regulate mud
from logging roads? The timber industry is hoping that the U.S. Supreme Court will maintain business as usual on controlling muddy
water running off logging roads into salmon streams.

Midwest ranchers, lawmakers protest EPA flyovers.
Midwest ranchers have never been enamored with environmental regulators, but they really began to complain after learning that federal inspectors were
flying over their land to look for problems.

The Other Judicial Decision. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia threw out a pro-industry petition [on 6/27/2012] that challenged the Environmental Protection Agency's assertion that carbon dioxide
(CO2) is a "pollutant" that endangers public health and is a factor in global warming. It was an 81-page decision, based in part on a 2007 SCOTUS
decision that ruled 5-4 that the 1970 Clean Air Act empowered the EPA to regulate CO2, even though that was never the original intent of the Act.
It is a ruling that will permit the EPA to continue to wreak havoc on business and industry, large and small, based entirely on the greatest science
hoax in history.

EPA
Grossly Overstates Economic Benefits of Regulation. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is grossly overstating the
economic benefits of its various environmental restrictions, environmental expert Richard Trzupek told the Energy and Environment
Subcommittee of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. Trzupek, a chemist and environmental consultant, told
the House subcommittee in June 6 written testimony that EPA routinely claims enormous economic benefits are created by its
regulations. Those benefits, Trzupek explained, rest on far-fetched claims regarding "premature deaths avoided" and gains
in worker productivity.

Alaska sues to block
low-sulfur fuel requirement for ships. The state of Alaska sued the Obama administration on Friday to block
environmental regulations that would require ships sailing in southern Alaska waters to use low-sulfur fuel. The
lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Anchorage, challenges the new federal regulations, which require the use of
low-sulfur fuel for large marine vessels such as cargo and cruise ships.

Lead Paint Rule All Wet. If you are planning home
renovations, expect to pay extra if you live in an older home. A federal court has ruled that a U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) rule related to lead paint applies to all homes built before 1978 — without exceptions. That means
regulatory costs will be passed on to homeowners, even where lead paint poses little-to-no health threats.

EPA in Wonderland.
Why does America's economy feel like an SUV that is running on fumes? The Obama administration's laughably rigid
enforcement of a Baby Bush-era ethanol mandate typifies today's regulatory climate. When Uncle Sam governs with a
tire iron in his hand, U.S. companies wisely pull off the road and pray for new management. The Environmental
Protection Agency has slapped a $6.8 million penalty on oil refiners for not blending cellulosic ethanol into
gasoline, jet fuel, and other products. These dastardly petroleum-mongers are being so intransigent because
cellulosic ethanol does not exist. It remains a fantasy fuel. EPA might as well mandate that Exxon hire
leprechauns.

Choose your Poison, Communism or Other Dictatorship? I
thought we had choices in a free country but I was wrong. We moved as far away from the metro area as possible to escape [Home Owner
Associations]. We could have bought a parcel of land in the woods somewhere, but I am sure, EPA regulations would have made it impossible
since everything is close to marshland.

EPA: Thou Shalt Purchase Fuel That
Doesn't Exist. [Scroll down] American oil refiners must spend money to sue the federal government for relief
from some unobservable and very stupid rules rather than focus on creating jobs. Other businesses see all of this going on
and wonder if any moves they make will be met with similar EPA rulings. It's no wonder that most businesses are in a "holding
pattern" until the results of the 2012 election are known.

New Science Endangers EPA's
"Endangerment Finding". Strong cases were made that the EPA failed to completely consider new and influential
scientific results which have a direct relevance to the impact that climate change as a result of human greenhouse gas emissions
may have on the public health and welfare. Overwhelmingly, the "missing" science from the EPA's support documents included
evidence that either lessened the certainty that human GHG emissions were behind the observed changes in the climate, or provided
examples of positive impacts resulting from climate change on human health and welfare. It is a recipe for pure waste and
unintented consequences if EPA continues to propose regulations based upon static, even outdated, science in a field where the
scientific knowledge-base is rapidly evolving.

EPA Moving to Control All Water in the United
States. There is a story in Net Right Daily about landowner, Dexter Lutter of Noble County, who thought he was cleaning up the water supply and
creating a healthier environment for years to come. Instead, he is facing hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines from the EPA, whose main goal is
complete control over all land, air and water.

Landowner engages in clean water act; receives EPA fine.
Dexter Lutter was expecting an award; instead he got a $20,000 fine. He made environmental improvements on his land — his farm — by
taking steps to clean up the water supply and better preserve the soil, but the Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers fined him for
his efforts. "That's how out of touch I am," Lutter says. "I feel like we should have won a medal for what we did, but the EPA tells us we
were wrong."

Texas prevails at Fifth
Circuit in air case against EPA. In the latest legal turn in an ongoing fight over appropriate environmental regulation, the Fifth U.S. Circuit
Court of Appeals ruled Monday [8/13/2012] that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's rejection of a key Texas air permitting program violated the federal
Clean Air Act.

EPA Border Program
Ignores Environmental, Safety Damage From Illegals. In an effort to curb "high priority" environmental problems along the U.S.-Mexico border,
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) worked with Mexican officials last week to launch the "Border 2020 U.S.-Mexico Environmental Program." But
while the program seeks to abridge pollution in many areas, it neglects to mention the 1,000 tons of trash abandoned by illegal immigrants crossing the
border into the United States.

EPA denies challenge to biofuels rule.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) delivered a blow to the petroleum industry Monday [8/20/2012] by denying a petition that would have exempted
refiners from part of a biofuel blending mandate, according to documents obtained by The Hill. EPA shot down the American Petroleum Institute's
(API) challenge of the renewable fuel standard (RFS), according to Monday court filings with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
EPA determined that enough advanced biofuels — generally understood to be made from non-food products — existed to meet that portion
of the RFS for 2012.

Texas AG hails court 'victory' against EPA.
Republican leaders in Texas, who have spearheaded more than 20 lawsuits against the federal government in the last two years, trumpeted a second victory
in as many weeks Tuesday [8/21/2012] after an appeals court overturned regulations aimed at curbing downwind pollution.

EPA Smack-Down Number Six. Enacted in August 2011, the
Cross-State Air Pollution Rule was supposed to reduce air pollution emitted in one state and carried downwind to another. Under the Clean Air Act, if
pollution from the upwind state is causing the downwind neighbor to fail federal air quality tests, then the EPA can order the upwind state to reduce the
emissions causing the problem. But even such expansive authority from Congress is never enough for the Obama EPA. So the agency decided to use
the rule-making as a pretext to force down emissions even further — illegally, as it turns out.

EPA Levies
$40,000+ Fines on Landlords Who Fail to Provide 'EPA-Approved' Pamphlets to Tenants. "Thinking of renting or selling a home
or apartment?" asks the Environmental Protection Agency. "Make sure you disclose its lead-based paint history. Mr. Wolfe Landau
did not and it cost him a $20,000 fine." Landau is one of the many landlords and realtors fined by the EPA for failing to provide
an "EPA-approved" pamphlet to tenants seeking to rent or buy a house built before 1978. And for the EPA, the non-compliance business
is booming.

Government of, by and for the EPA. Seven score
and nine years ago, President Lincoln resolved to take increased devotion to ensuring that government of the people, by the people
and for the people shall not perish from the Earth. Yet, today, our lives are determined not so much by We the People, as by a
distant central government, particularly increasingly powerful, unelected and unaccountable Executive Branch agencies.
Foremost among them, by almost any standard, is the Environmental Protection Agency.

The Editor says...
There isn't any smog in this country except in a few large metro areas in the summer. The EPA is squandering billions
of dollars to fight a problem that does not exist.

Trashing the Constitution. Constitution
Day is Monday, Sept. 17, so I compiled a non-exhaustive list of the ways Barack Obama has violated the Constitution. [...] [For example,] Using
the EPA to attack America's energy industry. In 2010, the Senate refused to pass the "cap-and-trade" bill that would have created a
carbon-tax system, vastly increasing federal power over energy. The Environmental Protection Agency declared carbon dioxide a pollutant
anyway and began exerting raw bureaucratic power. Mr. Obama's green zealots nixed the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada and virtually
shut down new oil exploration and drilling.

EPA: Staff-wide Che Guevara
email an 'inadvertent error'. Environmental Protection Agency staff opened their inboxes Thursday to find an agency-wide
Hispanic Heritage Month email featuring a prominent picture of Marxist revolutionary Che Guevara, and largely plagiarized from the
website Buzzle.com. According to the EPA, the email — which heralded the beginning Hispanic Heritage Month on
Saturday and offered cultural details about Hispanics — was an accident and the employee responsible has apologized.

Is the EPA superagency bigger than the
President and Congress? Thanks to federal court rulings, even if Mitt Romney prevails in November, he will be hard-pressed to unilaterally
rein in regulatory overreach by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The problems at the agency are fixable, but they will require decisive
action by Congress and the president — and even then courts may remain a likely avenue for radical environmentalists to enact sweeping
restrictions on the energy industry, the wider economy, and everyone's standards of living.

The government that can require you to buy medical insurance
can also require you to buy gasoline you don't necessarily need.EPA Mandates Motorists
Buy At Least 4 Gallons of Gas at Ethanol-15 Pumps. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has mandated that all
consumers in the United States must purchase at least 4 gallons of gasoline when they go to the gas station, if they are
getting fuel from a pump that also offers a new E15 ethanol-gasoline blend.

What if you ride a motorcycle, or just need a gallon for your lawnmower?EPA
Institutes Minimum Gas Purchase Requirement For Some Stations. Representative Jim Sensenbrenner (R., Wis.) has a post on
the Hill's Congress Blog highlighting a bizarre new regulation from the EPA requiring some gas stations to sell at least four gallons of
gasoline at a time. It affects those that pump both E10 and E15 (gas with 10 percent or 15 percent ethanol) through the
same hose. Since E15 is pretty terrible for small engines and old cars (Sensenbrenner says it's "like metal in a microwave for a
small engine"), the theory is that when customers whose engines cannot handle it are buying gas, the four-gallon minimum would dilute any
residual E15 enough to keep it from damaging small engines.

The Editor says...
If E15 is that harmful, why isn't it sold from its own pump, like diesel fuel?

Ethanol Mandate Waiver: Decks Stacked Against
Petitioners. The Governors of Georgia, Texas, Arkansas, Delaware, Maryland, New Mexico, and North Carolina have petitioned EPA Administrator
Lisa Jackson to waive the mandatory ethanol blending requirements established by the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS). The petitioners hope thereby to
lower and stabilize corn prices, which recently hit record highs as the worst drought in 50 years destroyed one-sixth of the U.S. corn crop.
Corn is the principal feedstock used in ethanol production.

EPA Celebrates 'Children
Health Month,' Encourages Recruiting Students for 'Energy Patrols' at School. On [an EPA] website page is a link to a 26-page EPA report
entitled, "Sensible Steps to Healthier School Environment." In the report's chapter on Energy Efficiency, the EPA presents a box with items to help
establish "Energy Efficiency Opportunities for Schools." One of the items in the box reads, "Educate students and staff about how their behaviors
affect energy use. Some schools have created student energy patrols to monitor and inform others when energy is wasted."

Counting on Coal Country. Nearly four thousand people turned
out Friday [10/5/2012] in Abingdon, Virginia, to hear Mitt Romney declare his support for the coal industry, which has been besieged for more than three
years by President Obama's Environmental Protection Agency. A giant sign behind the Republican candidate proclaimed "Coal Country Stands With
Mitt," and many in the audience wore caps or T-shirts calling for an end to "Obama's War on Coal," a war that has escaped the notice of most Americans
outside coal-producing regions like southwest Virginia.

Obama Is Right. He sold himself to America as a
constitutional scholar. Yet when the minutiae of governing — proposing and crafting legislation and lobbying for its
passage — got too difficult, he hit the links and ruled by executive order. He couldn't get Congress — even
when he had super majorities in both houses — to agree to bankrupt the nation's economy with his idiotic cap and trade
legislation. Instead, he has had the EPA create regulations to implement the most disastrous parts anyway.

Levin
Legal Group Sues EPA For Records Of Controversial Regs Delayed Until After Election. "In July of this year, major media
outlets — this is in our complaint — published news reports indicating the EPA is intentionally delaying the
issuance of controversial new regulations till after the November election. [...] These news stories suggest several troubling
possibilities, including the Obama administration is improperly politicizing EPA activities, EPA officials are attempting to shield
their true policy goals from the public, and or EPA officials themselves are putting partisan interests above the public welfare.

Obama's EPA Plans for 2013. The November
elections will determine the direction of US climate policy — and therefore also energy policy and the pace of economic growth:
jobs, standards of living, budget deficits and inflation. Obama has already promised to make climate change the centerpiece of his
concern — with all that implies: "Green" energy policy, linked to loss of jobs (Keystone pipeline disapproval), rising gas prices
(ethanol mandates), and crony capitalism (Solyndra).

EPA, Water and Value for Tax Money. After the expenditure
of $85 billion of taxpayers' money to build 15,000 sewage treatment plants, the EPA has determined it is necessary to "invest" another $300 billion to
fix them.v Nearly 40 years after the Clean Water Act became law, the Journal reveals how deep into the abyss another federal program has sunk. Water-quality
objectives can often be met at 1% of the cost of the facility upgrades mandated by the EPA.

The EPA Is Moving The Goalposts, Even
After The Game Has Started. Football fans would be outraged if every time one team was preparing to kick a field goal the officials moved the goalposts
further back, making it harder to score. And yet the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) frequently moves the goalposts further away for companies and industries
trying to abide by countless federal regulations.

The EPA's Planned Destruction of the U.S. Economy.
If there was no other reason to defeat President Obama in November, it would be the planned destruction of what is left of the U.S. economy by the Environmental
Protection Agency. In "A Look Ahead to EPA Regulations for 2012" the minority staff (Republican) of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works
has issued a chilling review of a massive rise in the costs of living for all Americans, massive layoffs in all sectors of the economy, and the destruction of the
nation's energy and manufacturing sectors.

EPA anti-energy regulations killing jobs.
More and more, daily decisions are made less by responsible citizens than by nanny-state government, especially powerful, unelected, unaccountable executive branch
agencies in Washington. Among the worst is the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Under Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, EPA seeks not merely to
regulate, but to legislate; not merely to protect our health and environment against every conceivable risk, however far-fetched, but to control every facet of our
economy, livelihoods and lives.

Time to rein in the EPA.
The scientific enterprise at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is broken, contrary to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson's assertions that
"science is the backbone of everything we do at EPA," or that major regulations are based on the recommendations of EPA's "independent" science
advisors. As Americans face a fragile economy and skyrocketing energy prices fueled by President Obama's agenda, it is important to pull
back the curtain on the ideologically-driven processes EPA is using to justify an avalanche of costly rules.

What to expect in Obama's second term:
[#11] [Obama will continue] implementation of EPA rules for destroying American business and American jobs. He has no concept of how the
American economic system works and the fatal blow this will give to the economy; or, maybe, he is not really stupid but cunningly evil, with an
objective of exactly that: destroying the economy so that a new utopian gulag can be built from the ashes.

The EPA vs. State Economies. On Friday [11/16/2012], the
Environmental Protection Agency rejected petitions from the governors of Georgia, Texas, Arkansas, Delaware, Maryland, New Mexico, and North Carolina to suspend the
biofuel-blending requirements established by the federal renewable fuel standard (RFS) program. This program requires refiners to blend increasing quantities of
biofuel — mostly corn ethanol — into the nation's motor-fuel supply. The 2012 target is to blend 13.2 billion gallons of biofuel into
our gasoline, a quantity that ratchets up to 13.8 billion gallons in 2013.

Killing Animals to Save Animals: A Conundrum. There
is no scientific dispute that extinctions are occurring, that they are occurring at a rate above the natural level due to human action,
and that strenuous efforts are needed to protect critical habitats, to eliminate invasive competitors that threaten species, and to prevent
over-exploitation. Yet, animal rights activists who are fighting eradication point to a real conundrum: how do humans choose
which creatures are more worthy of survival?

Dirty Secrets at the EPA. What do you suppose President
Obama's initial instruction were to his agency heads: Lisa Jackson at the EPA, Dr. Steven Chu at Energy, Ken Salazar at Interior and Tom Vilsack at
Agriculture? "Go forth and regulate. Wrap American business in enough red tape to hamstring their efforts to grow or prosper. Restrict energy
wherever you can, favoring 21st Century green power, use lots of ethanol — fuel of the future, and try to get rid of dirty coal." One
would hope that such orders were improbable, but the results would seem to indicate something along those lines.

EPA should consider
American drivers, not special interests. Reducing dependence on foreign oil is an important goal. However, the
EPA should not allow new fuels without assurances that it won't mean shorter engine life and more trips to the pump. As Americans
are trying to do more with less, Congress should ensure that the EPA considers the needs of American drivers who rely on their cars
every day, not certain special interest lobbies.

A
Supremely Important Decision About America's Logging Industry. On December 3, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider who
is best suited to set national environmental policy — the experienced scientists and regulators at the Environmental Protection
Agency or activist trial lawyers. [...] Under the Ninth Circuit ruling, a permit could be demanded for every drain and ditch that
directs water from a logging road to a fish-bearing stream. The U.S. Forest Service estimates that getting all its roads fully
certified could take as much as a decade.

AAA
says certain ethanol fuel can damage cars, asks EPA to remove from pumps. The recently approved use of E15 fuel made from
blending gasoline and ethanol could damage vehicles and void warranties says the American Automobile Association (AAA), which is urging
the federal government to ban it from the market. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved the fuel earlier this summer,
but AAA says only five percent of vehicles on the road are approved by the manufacturers to use the special blend they say causes
significant problems such as accelerated engine wear and failure, fuel-system damage and false "check engine" warning lights.

EPA refuses to waive ethanol mandate.
The Environmental Protection Agency is rejecting requests from states and meat industry groups to waive regulations that require the blending of
ethanol into gasoline. EPA rejected petitions from nearly a dozen states, including Texas, Virginia, and Maryland, for waivers of the federal
Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS). "[T]he agency has not found evidence to support a finding of severe 'economic harm' that would warrant granting
a waiver of the Renewable Fuels Standard," EPA said Friday [11/16/2012].

Sen. Sessions to
EPA: Show Me Evidence for Obama's Global Warming Agitprop. Today [12/4/2012], Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) directed a
letter to Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson asking for clarification on President Obama's recent statement
that "the temperature around the globe is increasing faster than was predicted even 10 years ago." That position has been
used by the administration to push the possibility of vastly increased regulation of carbon emissions.

EPA Employee Demoted for Prison Telephone
Scheme. An Environmental Protection Agency employee was demoted and reassigned in April "due to involvement in a telephone
calling scheme" involving prison inmates, according to the agency's recently released semi-annual report to Congress. "The scheme
involved using government telephone lines that gave inmates at a prison in Illinois access to EPA telephone lines in order to make
personal telephone calls from prison," the report stated. "The employee reportedly received compensation for performing this act."
The employee was not fired for this violation.

What's EPA smoking? As reported in an October
2003 study published in the American Medical Association's Archives of Internal Medicine, the risk of sudden death among those who smoked as
long as 10 years was zero. If you can smoke for 10 years and have zero chance of sudden death, you can breathe average U.S.
air for thousands of years with zero risk of sudden death. Given that the "worst" U.S. air has, perhaps, twice the level of PM2.5 as
average U.S. air, you even could breathe the "worst" U.S. air for thousands of years with zero risk of sudden death. Therefore, the
EPA's claim that PM2.5 is killing people and the nation stands to reap billion of dollars' worth of health benefits from its new rule are
without merit.

AAA asks EPA to stop
sales of high-ethanol fuel. AAA urged the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to halt sales of gasoline with higher ethanol
concentrations Friday [12/7/2012], contending the fuel blend causes engine damage not covered under most auto warranties. EPA says that
cars made in the model year 2001 and later can handle E15, the fuel blend made up of 15 percent ethanol and 85 percent petroleum. But
automakers say EPA is only considering the fuel's impact on emissions control systems while disregarding the impact on the rest of the vehicle.

EPA's engine destroying gas may be coming soon.
Nine gas stations in the nation now have pumps with E15 gasoline. E15 is a blend of regular gasoline mixed with 15 percent ethanol.
The pumps are recognized by their black and orange labels. And that label is not something you want to ignore.

Government eyes crippling
climate-control measures. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is ready to unleash its first wave of carbon-dioxide
regulations. Some members of Congress want to tax hydrocarbon use and carbon-dioxide emissions. Moreover, United Nations climate
alarmists are trying to devise a new treaty to regulate energy use at the international level. Even one of these government actions would
send shock waves through the economy. If all three are imposed (or worse, imposed in conjunction with Obamacare and other tax increases on
job and wealth creators) the impacts will be devastating.

EPA to tighten standards for soot
pollution. In its first major regulation since the election, the Obama administration on Friday imposed a new air quality standard that
reduces by 20 percent the maximum amount of soot released into the air from smokestacks, diesel trucks and other sources of pollution.

Marxist EPA Wants to Regulate Water As a
Pollutant in Virginia. The EPA's latest overreach is beyond the pale. The inmates are in charge of the prison. Ken Cuccinelli likes to
call the EPA the "Employment Prevention Agency." In addition to preventing job creation, the EPA wants other peoples' private property and their money for
non-existant or minor problems.

EPA offers hints on fracking's future.
The Obama administration has pulled back the curtain on its long-awaited study of the possible correlation between water pollution and fracking, but
the full results and definitive findings of its far-reaching report won't be released until 2014. The review, the most sweeping federal survey
to date, likely will have major implications for the country's natural gas and oil boom spurred by hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, which has
transformed the U.S. fuel market and is reshaping the global energy landscape.

Congress may be stalled out, but the EPA
certainly isn't. The Environmental Protection Agency took a strategic timeout on their zealous regulatory agenda in the run-up to last
November's election, lest their many ambitious plans for job-killing regulations should put a damper on President Obama's prospects. Post-election,
however, it has been full steam ahead for the independent agency, and they are finally starting to release some of the some of the rules and regulations
to which we are all going to be forced to adjust over the coming years.

Just
Freeze! EPA Says Burning Wood Is Bad, but so Is Natural Gas, Coal, Oil. So, you're living in Fairbanks, Alaska, and it's 45 degrees
below zero, Fahrenheit. The high today will be -39 degrees below zero. The weather services all project lots more double-digit minus
numbers in the coming days and weeks, with dips into the minus 50s and 60s. Heating oil prices are killing your family budget, so you crank up
the wood stove and start burning some of the firewood you collected last summer. Uh-oh! Now you're in trouble!

EPA's statistics not science, but nonsense.
The scientific and medical reality is that ambient air pollution — even as grimy, stinky, eye-watering and ugly as it is in
China — does not kill or hasten death. Fine particulate matter was such a public health problem, in fact, that no one knew about it
until EPA-funded researchers invented it in 1993 — 30 years after the Clean Air Act was enacted. Since the Clinton administration,
the agency has been using its invention to impose billions and billions of dollars of costs on our economy in return for the entirely imaginary benefit
of tens of thousands of lives saved annually.

EPA offers hints on fracking's future.
Fracking is safe until the Obama administration finishes burying the coal industry. Obama allows fracking to flourish because low gas
prices are killing coal. But when that mission is accomplished, watch out frackers.

EPA Sued Over Heinous Experiments on Humans.
After accumulating evidence via the Freedom of Information Act that showed the Environmental Protection Agency conducted disturbing experiments that
exposed humans to inhalable particulates the agency has said are deadly, sound science advocate Steven Milloy has sued the federal government.

Court: Stormwater runoff
not a pollutant, EPA can't regulate it. A federal judge ruled Thursday that the Environmental Protection Agency exceeded
its authority by trying to regulate water as a pollutant and restricting stormwater flow into a Fairfax County creek. "Stormwater
runoff is not a pollutant, so EPA is not authorized to regulate it," said federal judge Liam O'Grady, who sided with the county and
Virginia in the ruling.

Obama's Lawless Presidency. [Scroll down]
Obama has used the Environmental Protection Agency as a weapon repeatedly, as well. In only the latest example we find that a federal court
has determined that the EPA overstepped its boundaries by idiotically claiming that water is a "pollutant" in order to force its will on state
officials.

EPA's Attempt to Regulate the
Rain Washes Away. In the process of regulating everything under the sun, (literally) the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) recently made a bold grab at regulating everything from the clouds as well. More specifically, they had to defend themselves
in a court case in Virginia for the right to regulate the rainfall. The very fact that they would attempt something so bizarre is a
clear indication that despite the departure of their red tape-wielding leader Lisa Jackson, the EPA has no intentions of easing off the
regulatory gas pedal. Allow me to repeat that — the EPA made a case to regulate rain water.

The
Regulatory Landscape in America — A Morass Of Red Tape. The EPA in February finalized strict new
emissions standards for coal- and oil-fired electric utilities. The benefits are highly questionable, with
the vast majority being unrelated to the emissions targeted by the regulation. The costs, however, are
certain: an estimated $9.6 billion annually.

Obama's
Second Term Regulations That Will Destroy America. There are a large number of other planned EPA air and water regulations
either in force or in the works. EPA's Boiler MACT (Maximum Achievable Control Technology) standards are so restrictive that not
even many of the best-performing sources can meet them. Such companies will have no choice but to shut their doors and ship
manufacturing jobs overseas. The rule has been projected to reduce U.S. GDP by as much as 1.2 billion dollars, and to
destroy nearly 800,000 jobs. EPA's Cement MACT rule could cause 18 plants to shut down, eliminating up to 80,000 road, bridge and
building construction workers due to substantially increased cement costs. As with Boiler MACT, EPA had postponed decisions
on certain aspects of the rule until after the election.

The EPA's War on Home Appliances.
The 1992 Energy Policy Act states that all toilets sold in the United States use no more than 1.6 gallons of water per flush.
These water restrictions are the reason why we have to use plungers far more often than we used to. As strange as it may seem,
there used to be a thriving black market for Canadian toilets that actually flush. As the executive editor of Laissez-Faire Books
Jeffrey Tucker writes, "What we have in these regulations passed since the 1990s is therefore a step backwards from a central aspiration
of mankind to dispose of human waste in the best possible way. We have here an instance of government having forced society into a
lower stage of existence."

EPA: Green Gone Wild. The U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) wants to vastly expand its power. Last year, the agency paid nearly $700,000 to the National
Academy of Sciences to draft the document "Sustainability and the U.S. EPA." This manifesto rationalizes why the EPA has the right to
regulate every business, community and ecosystem in the country. The key to the EPA's regulatory control is " sustainability," an
illusive and ill-defined term even more broadly applicable than the interstate commerce clause.

Judge rules EPA can't mandate
use of nonexistent biofuels. The court sided with the country's chief oil and gas lobby, the American Petroleum Institute,
in striking down the 2012 EPA mandate that would have forced refineries to purchase more than $8 million in credits for 8.65 million
of gallons of the cellulosic biofuel. However, none of the biofuel is commercially available.

Court rejects EPA biofuel mandate. Cellulosic
biofuel is ethanol fermented from products other than corn, which is the major source of biofuel production in the United States. The U.S.
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that the mandate for 2012, which would have held oil refiners accountable for purchasing
8.65 million of gallons of the biofuel even though none is commercially available for sale, was based on flawed projections.

EPA's carbon regs not based
on sound science. The bottom line is that no scientist or team of scientists has come up with an empirically validated
theory proving what the EPA claims it knows with 90 to 99 percent certainty. Moreover, if the EPA's three lines of
evidence are so easily refuted, then the EPA's strong claim of causality, that higher carbon emissions affect sea levels and severe
storm, flood and drought frequency, is on ever shakier ground.

EPA's illegal human
experiments could break Nuremberg Code. The Obama Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) says no law empowers any judge to
stop it from conducting illegal scientific experiments on seniors, children and the sick. That astounding assertion will be tested
Friday [1/4/2013], when a federal district court in Alexandria decides whether it has jurisdiction to hear claims made by the American
Tradition Institute that EPA researchers are exposing unwary and genetically susceptible senior citizens to air pollutants the agency
says can cause a variety of serious cardiac and respiratory problems, including sudden death.

EPA
chief compares auto standard move to finding cigarette-cancer link. In an interview with the Tulane University student
newspaper published Thursday [1/31/2013], outgoing Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson, a Tulane alumna, said
that her agency's 2009 "endangerment finding," which directly led to the implementation of the auto standards to fight greenhouse gas
emissions, is her proudest achievement and represented a major step forward for public health.

The EPA vs. Reality.
The Environmental Protection Agency has been demanding the impossible of refiners and then penalizing them when they fail to comply.
A new ruling from a federal appeals court stops this shakedown. For the past few years, the EPA has required refiners to purchase
vast quantities of cellulosic biofuel, which is made from non-edible plant parts such as wood, grass, and cornstalks, and to use it in the
gasoline they produce. The problem? The EPA wants refiners to buy more of this fuel than is available on the
market — or has ever been available, for that matter. When those refiners have understandably failed to
comply, the EPA has forced them to pay for an exemption.

The Real Barack Obama. The country may be
catching on: Barack Obama is our first knee-jerk liberal president. And now that he will never face the voters again, he doesn't mind
showing it. [...] Obama will soon fill key vacant posts at the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Energy. Reuters reports
that the front runner in the race to become the new head of the EPA is Gina McCarthy, who is now the assistant administrator for the Office of Air
and Radiation, which makes her the point person for the administration's "war on coal" campaign.

EPA caught sabotaging
fracking. [Ed Lasky has] written numerous columns regarding President Obama's War against Inspectors General.
These are the taxpayer advocates within various government agencies who seek to ensure that fraud, waste and abuse of power is
prevented. Hence, Obama determined opposition to them that has gone to such lengths as character assassination, attempts
to form a new $30 billion-dollar agency without an Inspector General, failing to replace Inspectors General when they depart.
Now comes news that again illustrates the reasons Obama has tried to gut the Inspector General program: one is investigating
possible abused or power at the EPA as part of its crusade against energy producers.

Environmental Correction Agency. A
federal watchdog is investigating Environmental Protection Agency enforcement actions against a Texas natural gas company
that the agency claimed contaminated drinking water through its drilling activities in the state. The investigation,
initiated in July 2012 but announced publicly for the first time on Tuesday [2/12/2013], could substantiate allegations
that the agency ignored information in its investigation that might have cast doubt on its findings.

Obama's picks for EPA, Energy all about climate
change. President Barack Obama plans this week to nominate Gina McCarthy to head the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and nuclear
physicist Ernest Moniz as his Energy Department chief, according to numerous press reports.

EPA's fuel folly. [Scroll down]
In 2010, the first year of the mandate, EPA projected that 5 million gallons of cellulosic biofuels would be available.
In fact, there were none. In 2011, EPA increased the mandate to 6.5 million gallons. Again, the actual amount
available was zero. Undeterred, in 2012, EPA increased the required amount to 8.5 million gallons. The actual
available amount was 25,000 gallons. Since it is impossible to comply with the mandate to use this phantom fuel, EPA is
effectively taxing the industry. This tax is passed to consumers in the form of higher gas prices. EPA's overestimates
are part of an intentional strategy.

Another
Made Up Mandate on Energy that Doesn't Exist. The dream to "achieve" is cellulosic biofuel or ethanol — which
has an admirable goal of producing a renewable transportation fuel without impacting the world's food supply. Different from corn- or
sugar-based ethanol — which is technologically achievable (with questionable benefits) — cellulosic ethanol is
made from wood chips, switchgrass, and agricultural waste, such as corn cobs. The problem is the dream doesn't match reality.

Is it time to get rid of the EPA?
[Scroll down] I found EPA to be relentlessly anti-science, anti-technology and anti-industry. The only thing it seemed
to be for was the Europeans' innovation-busting "precautionary principle," the view that until a product or activity has been
definitively proven safe, it should be banned or at least smothered with regulation. In fact, during international discussions
and negotiations over the harmonization of biotechnology regulations in which I participated, EPA often seemed allied with the
European Union and committed to working against U.S. interests. I was baffled by all this until I realized that EPA was a
miasma populated by the most radical, disaffected and anti-industry discards from other agencies [...]

Environmental Protection Agency Funding Up
51% Since 2008. Inflation-adjusted spending by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has increased by 51% since fiscal
2008, according to Treasury Department data. In 2008, EPA funding was $7,938,000,000, according to the final Monthly Treasury
Statement for fiscal year 2008. That equals $8,464,894,460 in 2012 dollars, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation
calculator. Meanwhile, EPA funding was $12,796,000,000 in fiscal year 2012. That's a 51.1 percent increase over four
years.

Obama's
EPA Nominee Vowed Not 'To Sit Around and Wait for Congressional Action'. President Barack Obama on Monday [3/4/2013]
nominated Gina McCarthy to replace Lisa Jackson as Environmental Protection Agency administrator. McCarthy, who currently
heads the EPA's air and radiation office, has vowed "not to sit around and wait for congressional action" when issuing environmental
regulations. On May 1, 2010, in the keynote address for the Green Education Celebration at University of Massachusetts in Boston,
McCarthy said she did not go to Washington to wait for congressional action and she said she did not intend to do so in the future.

Carbon Power Politics.
President Obama gave his second-term global warming agenda a lot more definition Monday [3/4/2013] with a new Environmental
Protection Agency chief to replace Lisa Jackson. Picking Gina McCarthy, one of her top lieutenants and the architect of
some of the agency's most destructive carbon rules, is a sign he intends to make good on his vow of "executive actions" if
Congress doesn't pass cap and tax.

Environmental Zealots vs.
the Constitution. President Obama has given more indication about what we can expect from the EPA in his second-term
global warming agenda. He has picked Gina McCarthy, one of Lisa Jackson's top lieutenants to head the Environmental Protection
Agency as its new chief. Over the past four years, McCarthy has run the EPA's air office, as a notably willful regulator.
Her promotion gives notice that Obama has given up on getting agreement from Congress on his anticarbon agenda, particularly given
the number of Senate Democrats from coal or oil states. The real climate fight is now over the shape of rules to come that
could be released as early as this summer, and apparently a brutal under-the-table lobbying campaign is now underway.

The EPA's nonexistent-product mandate.
First, President Obama decided that the government can punish consumers if they don't buy a particular product (e.g., health insurance).
Now, his administration has decided that the government can punish consumers if they don't buy a product that can't be purchased because it
doesn't exist. At one time such a notion would have been laughed off as preposterous. It would have been considered unfair
(before the president made himself the ultimate authority on what's fair and what isn't). But that's what the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) has been doing.

Gore's
group says Obama EPA pick will fight global warming. Minutes after President Obama announced that his pick to run
the EPA would be the agency's greenhouse gas foe Gina McCarthy, former Vice President Al Gore's climate change group
heralded the pick, an indication that global warming foes are expecting her to step up the administration's green fuel effort.

The EPA Opens a New Front in the War on
Coal. The rapid pace and severity of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations on the energy sector during the past
four years illustrates an ongoing problem — the government's impediment to an economic recovery. The EPA's mandates have
unfairly discriminated against certain sectors of the energy industry, most notably coal, pointlessly killing desperately needed jobs.
On top of the regulations that have questionable benefits at best, the EPA has withheld permits for coal mining that were already approved
by other agencies, gratuitously delayed permits, and even rescinded previously issued permits.

Investing in Bad Science. [Scroll down] The
master of waste, fraud, and abuse among the research-funding agencies, though, is the Environmental Protection Agency, the logo of which should be a
Golden Fleece flanked by dollar signs. EPA, with a research budget in excess of $800 million, has long been more concerned with public
relations than public health. A scheme was exposed several years that would have diverted EPA "research" funds to pay outside public relations
consultants up to $5 million over five years to improve the website of the Office of Research and Development, conduct focus groups on how to
polish the office's image, and produce ghostwritten articles praising the agency "for publication in scholarly journals and magazines."

Congressmen
demand investigation of EPA selectively blocking FOIAs. An internal email that appears to counsel Environmental
Protection Agency officials on delaying or obstructing inconvenient Freedom of Information Act requests has sparked congressional
demands for an investigation. Senators David Vitter, R-LA, and Charles Grassley, R-IA, and Rep. Darrell Issa, R-CA, said in a
letter today [3/7/2013] to Attorney General Eric Holder that the investigation should seek to determine if EPA officials stonewall FOIA requests.

EPA
Nominee Gina McCarthy Has A History Of Misleading Congress. President Obama has nominated Gina McCarthy to succeed
Lisa Jackson as EPA administrator. When the Senate takes up her confirmation, lawmakers should be aware that McCarthy, the
current chief of air regulation at EPA, has a history of misleading Congress and the public about her agency's greenhouse gas
regulations. At a hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in October 2011, McCarthy denied motor
vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) emission standards are "related to" fuel economy standards. In so doing, she denied plain
facts she must know to be true. She did so under oath.

Supreme
Court sides with timber industry in runoff dispute, dealing blow to environmentalists. In a defeat for environmentalists, the
Supreme Court on Wednesday [3/20/2013] sided with the U.S. timber industry in a dispute over whether loggers should have to get special
EPA permits because of gravel and dirt falling into nearby waterways. In a 7-1 vote, the court reversed a lower-court ruling which
said the run-off from logging sites is the same as any other industrial pollution, requiring a Clean Water Act permit from the
Environmental Protection Agency.

President
Obama's EPA Pick Threatens Market Stability. President Obama has made it clear, both in word and action, that climate-change
regulation is a top priority for his second term. Putting aside the legitimate questions about the science behind climate-change
alarmism, the nomination of Gina McCarthy as EPA administrator is just the latest sign that the president is determined to push a
market-subverting, economy-handcuffing energy agenda on the American people.

EPA Proposal for New Gas
Standards Prompts Backlash. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced today a proposal for new standards for
cars and gasoline, causing a backlash by the oil industry, which claims the change will cost drivers even more at the pump.
The new nationwide standards for gasoline, which still have to go through public comment, will cut sulfur in gasoline by two-thirds,
from 30 parts per million to 10 ppm.

Oil
industry, lawmakers say EPA fuel rule would hike prices at the pump. The proposal, released Friday morning [3/29/2013], aims
to reduce sulfur in gasoline by more than 60 percent in 2017. The agency claimed the change would save lives and cut down
significantly on respiratory ailments by making the air cleaner. But critics questioned those claims, and said the plan would impose
higher gas prices on hard-hit families.

The Editor says...
The amount of sulphur dioxide in the air is about one third of the levels experienced in 1970 — when there were less than half
as many vehicles on the road.*
In 2011, there were 244,778,179 vehicle registrations.*
In 1970, there were 108,407,306 vehicles on the roads in the U.S.*
It is therefore safe to conclude that sulphur dioxide in the atmosphere isn't killing anybody — and thus any claims that the new
EPA regulations "would save lives" are specious. The purpose of this new regulation is to justify the EPA's existence and to
turn the screws a little tighter on "big oil."

Obama
administration moves ahead with sweeping rules requiring cleaner gasoline. The Environmental Protection Agency will move
ahead Friday [3/29/2013] with a rule requiring cleaner gasoline and lower-pollution vehicles nationwide, amounting to one of President
Obama's most significant air pollution initiatives, according to people briefed on the decision. The proposed standards would add less
than a penny a gallon to the cost of gasoline while delivering an environmental benefit akin to taking 33 million cars off the road,
according to a senior administration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the announcement had not been made yet.

The Editor says...
The senior administration official probably wanted to remain anonymous because his claims will someday be proven false:
This action won't make any noticeable improvement in air quality and will certainly cost more than a penny per gallon.

Senators:
'Far-left' group pushes EPA to implement cap-and-trade without congressional approval. Republican senators urged the
Environmental Protection Agency not to participate in a "sue-and-settle" arrangement with a law school policy institute that is trying to
require the agency to develop rules implementing cap-and-trade, even though Congress refused to pass the law. The New York Institute
for Policy Integrity told the EPA in November that it plans to file a lawsuit over the agency's failure to respond to IPI's request that it
create a rule implementing a cap-and-trade system for greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles.

Auto makers:
EPA gas rules good for environment, bad for wallets. The Environmental Protection Agency's stringent new gasoline rules
will be good for the environment but will cost both car manufacturers and consumers more money, automakers say. The Tier 3
standards, released Friday [3/29/2013], will require carmakers to reduce emissions and reduce the sulfur content of gasoline by 2017,
cutting sulfur by more than 60 percent and other pollutants by 80 percent.

EPA Settlement: Company Must
Spend $76,952 to Replace Light Bulbs. As part of a settlement with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Collis Inc.
of Clinton, Iowa has agreed to a "re-lamping" of its facility with low-mercury fixtures at a projected cost of $76,952. The
re-lamping will be a greater expense than the civil penalty to be paid. "A re-lamping project involving the replacement of
high-mercury fluorescent fixtures and bulbs with low-mercury fluorescent fixtures and bulbs at its facility with a projected
eligible cost of $76,952.00," the EPA settlement says.

Secretive
McCarthy not fit to head EPA. Gina McCarthy, President Obama's nominee to succeed Lisa Jackson as administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency, should be rejected for a variety of reasons, but one in particular stands out. McCarthy —
who has been EPA's assistant administrator for the office of air and radiation since 2009 — too often operates behind closed
doors in an agency with such immense regulatory powers that nothing less than maximum transparency is required to assure accountability.

Proposed EPA Sulfur
Standard to Boost Gas Prices. Tighter restrictions proposed on sulfur content will add a penny or less to the retail price
of a gallon of gasoline, according to the Obama administration, while the oil industry contends those same rules could hike prices at the
pump as much as nine cents per gallon. [...] Regulations now limit sulfur content in gasoline to ten parts per million in smog-ridden
California, but up to 30 parts per million in all other states. The new rule would impose the California standard on the
entire nation.

Obama Chooses Energy Foe Gina McCarthy to Lead
EPA. President Barack Obama told reporters in early March he is choosing EPA Assistant Administrator Gina McCarthy, architect of unprecedented
restrictions on energy use and power generation, to become the new head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. McCarthy is a longtime
advocate of energy restrictions she says are necessary to stop global warming. She also says government should actively seek to transform energy
production in the United States away from affordable conventional sources and toward more-expensive renewable alternatives.

A Bizarre New 'Rain Tax' Makes A Splash In Maryland.
The Chesapeake Bay faces a serious pollution problem. The Environmental Protection Agency decreed in 2010 that Maryland had to stop so much stormwater
runoff from draining into the Bay, a project that would cost $14.8 billion. To pay for that, authorities decided to tax "impervious surfaces" —
in the words of The Gazette, "anything that prevents rainwater from seeping into the earth (roofs, driveways, patios, sidewalks, etc.) thereby causing stormwater
runoff."

The 'Rain Tax'. In 2010 the
Obama administration's Environmental Protection Agency ordered Maryland to reduce stormwater runoff into the Chesapeake Bay so that nitrogen levels
fall 22 percent and phosphorus falls 15 percent from current amounts.

The Editor says...
The Chesapeake Bay has a pollution problem only because the EPA says so. The EPA has chosen arbitrary reduction goals of 22% and 15% for chemicals
that will make their way into the Chesapeake Bay eventually, even if all the storm drains are plugged up. The EPA is apparently just making
excuses for new taxes. I've never been to the Chesapeake Bay, but I've never heard anyone say it is horribly polluted — except the EPA.

EPA's dirty secret about the
environment. The Environmental Protection Agency late last month proposed strict new "clean fuel" standards on gasoline.
The EPA said the so-called Tier 3 rule would cut emissions of smog-forming pollutants, as well as toxic emissions like benzene.
What the EPA didn't say was that levels of these pollutants have been falling steadily for years, and would continue to fall even without
the new rule, which the oil industry says will cost tens of billions of dollars.

An Imaginary Dustup?
The Incalculable Harm of Regulation. [Scroll down] If you operate a grain elevator in St. Joseph, Missouri, or a
fertilizer business in my home town, what incentive do you have to grow, to expand, to invest? You're on notice that you are
dangerous, that your activities are a threat to others. If you are that fertilizer dealer, you've also learned something else.
You've learned to be extremely cynical about the whole enterprise.

White House,
Senate Democrats seething over blocked EPA vote. Republicans on Thursday boycotted a congressional hearing for President
Obama's nominee to lead the Environmental Protection Agency, putting the nomination in doubt and enraging White House officials who
dismissed the act as the most blatant case yet of GOP obstructionism. The boycott was a major blow to Gina McCarthy's chances of
winning a filibuster-proof confirmation vote in the Senate, given that, without the Republicans, progressives can't even get McCarthy
through committee.

Washington
bureaucrats use force to suffocate liberty. Remember Armand Armendariz, the Environmental Protection Agency regional administrator
who resigned after regaling an audience of Big Green activists with a history lesson to illustrate his agency's approach to critics of the EPA's
harshest policies? When the Romans conquered a new province, he said, they would "... find the first five guys they saw and they'd
crucify them ..." to make the province "really easy to manage for the next few years." The EPA, he continued, also makes "examples
of people who are not complying with the law, you make examples out of them, use it as a deterrent method ... Find people who are not complying
with the law and you hit them as hard as you can and make examples of them."

President
Obama gets an 'F' for management. For example, unable to obtain congressional approval, even among moderate Democrats,
for limits on carbon dioxide emissions and other environmental goals, the Environmental Protection Agency — at his public
behest — has written regulations imposing new and onerous requirements on business. The Obama Credo of Management:
We'll do as we please, stop us if you can.

A Supreme Court EPA
Decision That Could Cost Taxpayers $21 Billion Per Year. Is the Clean Air Act so badly flawed that it will cripple
environmental enforcement and economic development alike unless the EPA and its state counterparts defy clear statutory provisions or,
alternatively, spend $21 billion a year to employ an additional 320,000 bureaucrats? That is a central issue in a recent
lawsuit by the Southeastern Legal Foundation, the Competitive Enterprise Institute and a host of lawmakers and several companies.
They are petitioning the Supreme Court to review an appellate court decision upholding the EPA's global warming regulations.

EPA Ammunition Ban Blocked By Federal Court.
A federal court on Thursday [5/23/2013] halted an effort by the Environmental Protection Agency to ban all ammunition containing lead, much to the dismay of gun
control groups hoping to use environmentalism to "make an end run around the Second Amendment" right of access to ammunition, according to officials from
several organizations representing gun owners and manufacturers.

Obama Revolving Door: Former EPA
head Lisa Jackson to Apple. Apple is investing big time in renewable energy, and so the company — whose historical relative
aversion to politics has earned it an investigation from the Senate — is now investing more seriously in politics. Apple CEO Tim Cook
announced at a tech conference Tuesday that it was hiring President Obama's former Environmental Protection Agency director, Lisa Jackson, as a vice
president for environmental initiatives. This isn't very surprising on one level — people with top government positions in renewable
energy tend to cash out to industry.

Why Did Apple Hire Lisa Jackson?
Before coming back to the federal EPA, [Lisa] Jackson ran the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection during the Corzine administration
(before becoming Corzine's chief of staff). Though Jackson seems to have steered clear of the corruption around her, the state's environmental
apparatus has played an important role in Jersey's corrupt state Democratic machine, which went something like this: miles of red tape were
backed up by the use of obscure and blatantly irrelevant laws to make building a structure — home or commercial — in
many cases close to impossible. That enabled politicians and bureaucrats at various state agencies to go looking for bribes and kickbacks
to cut through that tape or to change zoning laws to increase favored property values.

'Deplorable'
Conditions Cited at EPA Warehouse in Maryland. The report found that the 70,000-square-foot warehouse — one
of EPA's largest — was storing large amounts of expensive, unused equipment, ranging from computers to pianos.
It also found numerous security and safety issues. "Personally identifiable information and agency sensitive files —
such as passports and legal files — were located in unsecured open boxes throughout the warehouse," the report states.
"There was a locked office inside the facility for which we could not determine a purpose."

Stricter
EPA Ozone Rules Could Put 'Entire Country' Out of Business, Industry Group Warns. American Petroleum
Institute Director of Regulatory and Scientific Affairs Howard Feldman warned that new ozone regulations currently
under review by the Obama administration and the Environmental Protection Agency could put "nearly the entire country"
out of business. "Such strict standards are not justified from a health perspective and are not needed to continue
air quality progress," Feldman said Thursday on a conference call with reporters.

Obama
officials raise 'social cost' of carbon in federal regulations. The Obama administration has increased the "social cost"
of carbon emissions in federal regulations, a move that could lay the groundwork for new rules on climate change. The order,
handed down by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) with little fanfare, bumps the so-called social cost of carbon — a
monetized estimate of health, property and environmental damage — to $35 per metric ton, up from $21. The directive
requires all federal agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency, to use the new figure when crafting regulations.

Secret Man Caves Found in EPA
Warehouse. A warehouse maintained by contractors for the Environmental Protection Agency contained secret rooms full of
exercise equipment, televisions and couches, according to an internal audit. EPA's inspector general found contractors used
partitions, screens and piled up boxes to hide the rooms from security cameras in the 70,000 square-foot building located in Landover,
Md. The warehouse — used for inventory storage — is owned by the General Services Administration and
leased to the EPA for about $750,000 per year.

Federal Kudzu Is Strangling This Great Nation.
[Scroll down] In the past few years this bold [EPA] bureaucracy has undertaken to regulate dirt roads in remote forests and spills of
cow's milk on the barn floors of Amish farmers. What is more, the EPA has plainly embarked upon a mission to shut down the entire coal
industry. On May 24, West Virginia and Montana officials announced that their states are joining Kansas in its legal challenge to
the EPA's "anti-coal" policies. According to West Virginia's Democratic governor Earl Ray Tomblin, "The EPA's proposed limits on
greenhouse gas emissions threaten the livelihood of our coal miners to the point of killing jobs and crippling our state and national
economies, while also weakening our country's efforts toward energy independence."

There are four
separate scandals going on at EPA right now. Oh, that we were not flooded with scandals already, this might actually rate
some coverage. But alas, as it is, even a news junkie like myself didn't know there were four separate EPA scandals going on until
Gabriel Malor laid it out for me.

Environmental
Rules Delayed as White House Slows Reviews. The White House has blocked several Department of Energy regulations that would
require appliances, lighting and buildings to use less energy and create less global-warming pollution, as part of a broader slowdown of
new antipollution rules issued by the Obama administration.

Try as they might...EPA fails to link fracking to
water contamination for the third time. The Environmental Protection Agency announced that it is dropping its plans to issue a report on
whether hydraulic fracturing caused groundwater contamination in Wyoming. The agency said it will no longer have outside experts review that
theory. This marks the third time that the EPA has failed to link hydraulic fracturing — more commonly known as fracking —
with groundwater contamination, a major environmentalist objection to the drilling practice.

EPA Covers Up The Safety Of Fracking.
As we noted in December 2011, the Environmental Protection Agency, under pressure from environmental groups, tried to manufacture a crisis in which hydraulic
fracturing, or fracking, was said to have contaminated test wells in Pavillion, Wyo. Those claims and others made in the six-decade history of the technology's
use have repeatedly proved groundless.

Report: Obama's EPA power balloons. The authority
granted to the Environmental Protection Agency has exploded under the Obama administration, regulating vast sections of the national economy, according
to a new report. A report by the libertarian American Legislative Exchange Council found that the EPA's new authority has cost taxpayers billions
of dollars and the economy millions of jobs, while also usurping the authority of states to govern their own environmental affairs.

'Environmental Justice,' EPA Style.
Both [the civil rights and environmental] movements are stuck in the past, comparing issues of perceived environmental injustice to extreme
events long past: for the civil rights movement, it is always the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma; for the environmental movement, the
Cuyahoga River still burns. Christopher Foreman of the Brookings Institution, author of the best dispassionate study of the issue,
notes that "the flexible locution 'environmental racism' is inherently provocative and was intended to be so."

Obama's Fundamental
Transformation of a Nation He Despises. [Scroll down] Now, with the help of "extreme weather" coverage on every mainstream
news service, he has been ginning up another crisis as the pretext for sweeping regulation of the entire economy. And just last week,
in a speech at Georgetown University, he has announced what that regulation will cover. It will cover just about everything.
Every activity that uses energy, or that used energy in its manufacture or requires energy for its maintenance, will be regulated —
not by Congress but by the president directly. That is the strategy behind Obama's new pronouncements on the "social cost" of carbon
emissions. [...] But what is the "social cost" of carbon? It is the cost of future climate events that "might result" from increased
carbon emissions.

Is Climate Change Our
No. 1 Crisis, Mr. President? At the heart of Obama's program are EPA regulations that will make it impossible to open any new coal plant
and will systematically shut down existing plants. "Politically, the White House is hesitant to say they're having a war on coal," explained one
of Obama's climate advisers. "On the other hand, a war on coal is exactly what's needed." Net effect: tens of thousands of jobs killed,
entire states impoverished. This at a time of chronically and crushingly high unemployment, slow growth, jittery markets and deep economic uncertainty.

EPA Wants Gov't To
Control How Cold Your Beer Can Be. In a seemingly innocuous revision of its Energy Star efficiency requirements announced
June 27, the Environmental Protection Agency included an "optional" requirement for a "smart-grid" connection for customers to
electronically connect their refrigerators or freezers with a utility provider. The feature lets the utility provider regulate the
appliances' power consumption, "including curtailing operations during more expensive peak-demand times." So far, manufacturers
are not required to include the feature, only "encouraged," and consumers must still give permission to turn it on.

EPA Strikes Out on Anti-Fracking Campaign.
The EPA has worked mightily to demonstrate that Fracking causes water contamination, yet it has struck out again. While it has backed away
from other locations where it originally claimed damage from Fracking, it was at Pavilion, Wyoming that it tried, with great fervor, to prove that
Fracking caused water contamination. [...] But once again, it couldn't.

Fracking
phobia fails yet again. The EPA just dropped its study of fracking allegedly contaminating the water in Pavillion, Wyo. The
enviro left had rejoiced at the news a few years ago that the EPA had for the first time implicated fracking as a threat to groundwater.
Now, amid criticisms of its methodology, the EPA has backed down and won't issue a final report.

In Honor of Bill Clinton,
EPA Pushes ATF Hero Off Building. This Wednesday [7/17/2013], the Environmental Protection Agency will officially dedicate its office
building at 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue as the William Jefferson Clinton Federal Building. [...] There's just one slight problem — the
building already has a name.

The Editor says...
This is an obvious effort to put a positive light on the Clinton name, in preparation for Hillary's presidential run.

Court Mandates EPA Crack Down on New Emissions.
Should the federal government regulate emissions produced by dead trees? A federal appeals court said yes, striking down the Environmental
Protection Agency's attempt to delay regulation of biogenic carbon dioxide emissions from non-fossil fuel sources on Friday [7/12/2013].
The court affirmed the need for such emissions to be regulated under the Clean Air Act, negating the exemption made by the EPA for "biogenic
carbon dioxide."

Environmental Protection Agency Regulation Intrudes on State Rights.
In practice, cooperative federalism meant that the EPA and states worked together in order to effectively balance economic progress with environmental
protection, says William Yeatman, an energy policy analyst at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Since 2009, however, the EPA has radically
altered this balance of power. To be precise, the agency has expanded its own prerogatives, at the expense of the states' rightful authority.

Inaccurate EPA Mileage Tests Mislead
Consumers. Are automakers designing cars for drivers — or federal bureaucrats? It's worth asking. Tests found
that some top-rated cars performed far worse in the real world than they did in official EPA mileage tests.

Extreme
irony — EPA rules shut down the mother of all weather conspiracy theories. The High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program
(HAARP) — a subject of fascination for many hams and the target of conspiracy theorists and anti-government activists — has closed down. [... ] The
proximate cause of HAARP's early May shutdown was less fiscal than environmental, Keeney said. As he explained it, the diesel
generators on site no longer pass Clean Air Act muster. Repairing them to meet EPA standards will run $800,000.

New EPA chief promises jobs,
pulls no punches in climate change fight. In her first speech since taking over the Environmental Protection Agency, Gina McCarthy
came out swinging Tuesday [7/30/2013] and promised to ramp up the aggressive climate change agenda laid out by President Obama. The
outspoken Ms. McCarthy, who two weeks ago emerged from a bruising 136-day Senate confirmation battle, also dismissed criticism that her
agency is responsible for killing jobs and crushing the U.S. coal industry. The White House's clean-energy approach and a serious
effort to cut carbon emissions, she added, will produce jobs, not destroy them.

House issues subpoenas to get Benghazi
documents from State Department. As they prepared to head home for summer vacation, House Republicans fired off three subpoenas Thursday [8/1/2013]
seeking more information from the State Department on the terrorist attack last year in Benghazi, Libya, and on the science the Environmental Protection
Agency used to impose new clean air regulations.

The Deeply Secret Science of the EPA.
The EPA bolsters their case with drastic claims of all the people who will die if we don't eliminate the particular kind of pollution Ms. McCarthy is
pushing on any particular day. The EPA has gotten away with improbable claims about future deaths from whatever pollutant the EPA wants to ban.
Their unfounded regulations have been one of the most effective job killers of the past five years. Carbon is not a pollutant, but one of the
building blocks of life. We are carbon life forms. If we were to eliminate carbon from out atmosphere, we would eliminate all life.

Imaginary optimism. Only in
Washington would it take eight months to come up with a production quota for an imaginary product. The Environmental Protection Agency,
which is all too real, announced this week the latest renewable-fuel standards, which were due in January. Now the oil companies must
produce 6 million gallons of cellulosic ethanol, down from last year's target of 11 million. That's still 6 million gallons
too many, because cellulosic ethanol exists only in the fertile imagination of green fanatics.

Ethanol industry has EPA as ally in battle against big
oil. The 2005 Republican-passed energy bill created the RFS, known as the "ethanol mandate," and the 2007 Democrat-passed energy bill expanded it. Under
the law, oil refiners must purchase a set quantity of ethanol every year. Thanks largely to cars' improving fuel efficiency, gasoline consumption has fallen steadily
over the past few years, so refiners aren't selling enough gasoline to blend with the ethanol. Under the complicated structure of the ethanol mandate, this will drive
up costs for refiners, and thus drive up the price of gasoline.

EPA Endangerment Finding: At the time of the endangerment
finding there were several dozen global climate models, now there are at least 73. The US has 19. One climate model is sufficient — if it has been validated.
• EPA offers no direct physical evidence that greenhouse gases are causing significant global warming or the dire future hazards.
• EPA relies heavily on global climate models for forecasts of future harm from increasing temperatures.
• From 1990 (first IPCC report) to the 2009 EF, the EPA and the scientific organizations upon which it relies have failed to produce a valid model.
• Two decades is twice the time it took the Apollo team to model how to land men on the moon and bring them back, and to successfully complete the mission.
• Without direct physical evidence or a valid model, the EPA cannot establish causation — that greenhouse gases are responsible for significant
global warming or climate change.
• The failure to validate a model is recognized by the IPCC because after the 1990 report the IPCC shifted from using the scientifically proper
term "model predictions" to "model projections."
• The term "model projections" is scientifically nebulous.
• All studies based on the models that have not been validated are scientifically nebulous, such as those that claim dire future weather events.
• Climate change has been occurring for hundreds of millions of years. The EPA has produced no evidence that it can successfully explain natural climate change.
• Without understanding the natural causes of climate change, the EPA cannot scientifically understand the human influence on climate.

Why are publicly-funded scientists allowed to
keep their work secret? Who owns taxpayer-funded science? From the way many scientists behave, it's not the taxpayers. Many scientific studies funded by
federal agencies — through grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements, particularly those used to justify the most horrendous regulations — hide the
guts of the science. What the scientists keep secret is the raw data they obtain in the real world and the methods they use to interpret it, as if those were personal
possessions.

E.P.A. is the New Gestapo.
Just recently, a task force including members of 10 state and federal law enforcement agencies descended on a gold mine in the
tiny town of Chicken[,] Alaska[,] with a population of 17 last month, in what locals described as a raid. "Imagine
coming up to your diggings, only to see agents swarming over it like ants, wearing full body armor, with jackets that say
"POLICE" emblazoned on them, and all packing side arms," gold miner C.R. Hammond told the Alaska Dispatch. [...] According to
the EPA The investigation was into possible violations of the Clean Water Act. The officers were part of the Alaska
Environmental Crimes Task Force and visited the outpost near the Canadian border during the third week of August to investigate
water discharges into rivers, streams, lakes and oceans. This is how the EPA handles an investigation, with rifles,
handguns and bullet proof vests?

EPA Gets Go-Ahead for Pollution Plan. A federal judge has made a
decision on a case arguing whether actions under the Clean Water Act are the role of states of the federal government. As American Farm Bureau attorney
Ellen Steen explains, the ruling has big repercussions for the nation's farmers.

EPA regulations keep condemned
homes from being demolished in Pasco County. In June 2012, fire gutted a foreclosed home in Pasco County's Beacon Woods neighborhood. At the
time, residents were hopeful they wouldn't have to stare at the charred mess for too long. "I just hope the bank steps up and tears it down and cleans it
up," one resident remarked. Now, 15 months later, not much has changed.

Wall Street Messes Up the EPA's Sandbox.
[Scroll down] America's gasoline consumption has declined over the last six years. Improvements in gas mileage —
mostly impelled by a higher plateau for gas prices — have helped. This year we are projected to consume only 134 billion
gallons, down 6 percent from 2007. But the ethanol mandate has remained at 13.8 billion gallons. Consuming that much will
push us over the 10 percent "blend wall" where ethanol begins to harm car engines. Car manufacturers will not honor warrantees on
cars that are fueled with more than 10 percent ethanol. Consequently, refiners are stuck with a mandate for buying more ethanol
than they use. But never fear — the EPA had already created a mechanism for greasing the market.

EPA Foils Clean Fuel. By slowing the conversion of
vehicles to CNG (Compressed Natural Gas) fuel The Environmental Protection Agency is causing needless nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide, particulate,
and mercury air pollution. It might just as well be renamed the Environmental Destruction Agency. The EPA has set up a system
that adds thousands of dollars to the cost of converting a vehicle from gasoline or diesel oil to CNG, thus sapping a large proportion of the
possible fuel cost savings (CNG costs about half as much at the pump) from those who are thinking of switching.

CEI Suit Seeks Injunction Against Ongoing EPA
Record Destruction. Beginning in April, CEI filed a series of Freedom of Information Act requests seeking text messages from the EPA-issued
personal data assistants of Gina McCarthy, then head of the EPA's Air and Radiation Office and now the agency's Administrator, and her predecessor Lisa Jackson.
CEI first asked for her texts on 18 specified days when she was known to have testified before Congress and been seen sending texts. After EPA
acknowledged no such records existed, CEI obtained information relating to McCarthy's PDA bill that showed she sent 5,392 text messages over a three-year
period.

An Energy Star Window Into EPA Ineptitude.
[I]n its zeal for ever greater energy efficiency, the EPA now plans to impose new standards for windows that will add significantly to their price, putting Energy
Star-rated windows out of reach of most consumers. In colder climates, the new standard would likely require expensive triple-paned windows, the industry warns.
In an early draft, the EPA admitted that it would add an average $20 to Energy Star-rated windows.

The EPA's regulatory
authority, coming to a stream or estuary near you? You may recall the egregiously costly saga of the Sacketts, the Idaho couple personally
persecuted by the Environmental Protection Agency for developing their half-acre of lakeside private property that the EPA belatedly and arbitrarily deemed
a "protected wetland." The Sacketts fought the EPA's demand that they either stop development and "restore" the property (with non-native plants!) or
else face fines of up to $75,000 per day, but the EPA claimed that the Sacketts didn't even have the right to seek judicial review against the
EPA's administrative compliance order, because the compliance order wasn't their "final enforcement action" — which is basically made-up hogwash
that roughly translates as, "We're the EPA, we do what we want."

GOP accuses EPA of 'unprecedented'
power grab with proposed water rule. Two Republican lawmakers on the House Science Committee are accusing the Environmental Protection Agency of
pushing through a rule that could potentially expand the agency's regulatory authority over streams, wetlands and other bodies under the Clean Water Act.
Reps. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, and Chris Stewart, R-Utah, on Friday [10/18/2013] sent a letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy expressing concern over the
proposed draft rule, which they say would give the agency "unprecedented control over private property across the nation."

China smog emergency shuts city of 11 million people.
An index measuring PM2.5, or particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5), reached a reading of 1,000 in some parts of Harbin, the gritty capital of
northeastern Heilongjiang province and home to some 11 million people. A level above 300 is considered hazardous, while the World Health Organisation recommends
a daily level of no more than 20.

The Editor says...
The EPA standard is 12 micrograms per cubic meter, and "As a practical matter, the average level of PM2.5 in U.S. air is about 10 micrograms per
cubic meter," according to Steve Milloy.
The level that is "considered hazardous" is 30 times the U.S. average. In other words, the EPA's work is finished. The air here is as
clean as it has ever been.

Sen. David Vitter Calls on DOJ to Investigate Armed EPA Raid
in Alaska. Vitter, in a letter sent Tuesday [10/22/2013] to Attorney General Eric Holder, requested the Justice Department investigate the EPA raid, which
occurred at a gold mine in Chicken, Alaska earlier this year as part of an investigation into violations of the Clean Water Act. "The EPA's use of unnecessary armed
intimidation tactics against Alaska miners this summer was extreme, especially to investigate potential Clean Water Act violations from what are essentially a handful of
small business owners," said Vitter, the ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

The Editor says...
Senator Vitter might as well put his complaints in a letter to Santa Claus. Eric Holder isn't going to investigate — let alone
obstruct — any action by the EPA or any other federal agency.

Mission Creep: EPA Agents Enter Drug
War. A large-scale narcotics investigation and sentencing in Montana has revealed that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has
entered the enforcement of U.S. war on drugs. The EPA has full federal law enforcement capabilities, and their charter allows them to participate in the
investigation and prosecution of "criminal conduct that threatens people's health," according to the EPA's Criminal Investigation Division (EPA CID).

The EPA Gets High on Greenhouse Gases. The key event in the
Environmental Protection Agency's campaign to regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant came on April 2, 2007. It was the Supreme Court's decision
in Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency. Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for a five-member majority, held that the EPA had a
duty to decide whether greenhouse gas emissions from new vehicles are contributing to "air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger
public health or welfare." Six years later, the apocalyptic predictions about global warming have not been borne out, notwithstanding the dire
rhetoric of Justice Stevens's opinion. The earth's temperature has remained stable in the face of increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide
in the atmosphere.

Greens cheer EPA
wetlands proposal. Business groups and Republicans in Congress have opposed the EPA's move, which they call an unprecedented "power grab"
that could give it power to interfere with private lands. They say that the agency's scientific research has not been thorough enough to warrant
a new regulation. On Wednesday, Reps. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and Chris Stewart (R-Utah) sent a letter to the White House's budget office alleging
that the EPA was "rushing forward" with its effort to issue the new regulation. "Such unrestrained federal intrusion poses a serious threat to
private property rights, state sovereignty and economic growth," they wrote.

EPA Shutting Down
Last-standing U.S. Primary Lead Smelter. The last standing primary lead smelter in the United States will be closing in December —
thanks to the federal Environmental Protection Agency's continuing war on American industry. While environmental militants may cheer the demise of
the Doe Run Company smelter in Herculaneum, Missouri, as an ecological "victory," the plant's closure will have little-to-no positive environmental
impact, while causing significant economic harm. The potential implications for individual liberty and national security could prove to be even more
significant. Meanwhile, Congress continues to permit the EPA to wreak havoc on the American economy, with draconian regulations that have no basis
in science and are causing incalculable harm.

Federal Ethanol
Policy: Bad for the Planet, Good for Lobbyists. The federal government's push for greater ethanol production, carried out in the name of
saving the planet, has done great harm to the environment. [...] [W]hen EPA models indicated that the ethanol mandate would not make fuel green enough to
satisfy the law, the agency was pressured into rigging the input assumptions to produce the desired results. By assuming a huge increase in crop
yields (and thus fewer new acres plowed) but a very small increase in corn prices, the EPA was able to claim that ethanol-blended gasoline would
produce 21 percent fewer carbon dioxide emissions than standard gasoline, beating the law's emissions-reduction target by just one percentage
point. Those rigged assumptions turned out to be dead wrong.

EPA Stealthily Propels
Toward 'Massive Power Grab of Private Property Across the U.S.'. While the country is immersed in Obamacare headlines and a congressional
tussle over delays and mandates, the Obama administration is stealthily moving toward unprecedented control over private property under a massive
expansion of the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Water Act authority. The proposed rule, obtained by the House Science, Space, and
Technology Committee in advance of EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy's testimony at a Thursday [11/14/2013] oversight hearing, widely broadens the
definition of waterways over which the federal government has jurisdiction to as little as a water ditch in a backyard.

Lawmakers Urge
Administration to Stop EPA Takeover of Ponds, Ditches, Streams. Lawmakers are urging Environmental Protection Agency Administrator
Gina McCarthy and the White House to put the brakes on rulemaking that would drastically expand the agency's jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act.
The redefinition of "waters of the United States" would include all ponds, lakes, wetlands and natural or manmade streams that have any effect on
downstream navigable waters — whether on public lands or private property. [...] In a fast-tracking move, the EPA sent its draft rulemaking
proposal to the White House for approval before the scientific study on which the changes are based was peer reviewed.

In a first, EPA cuts ethanol standard.
In a move likely to anger corn farmers and their congressional representatives, the Obama administration Friday [11/15/2013] proposed the first-ever
cut in the amount of corn-based ethanol and other biofuels that must be mixed into the nation's gasoline, with the Environmental Protection Agency
concluding that the mandate set by Congress just six years ago is proving difficult and perhaps impossible for gas producers to meet. The move
could spark a fight from corn growers and those who have argued the ethanol mix was key to reducing the nation's dependence on foreign oil suppliers.

EPA proposes reducing biofuel mandate.
The Obama administration on Friday [11/15/2013] proposed to reduce the amount of ethanol in the nation's fuel supply for the first time, acknowledging
that the biofuel law championed by both parties in 2007 is not working as well as expected.

EPA 'Public
Listening Session' Turns Into Sierra Club Talking Session. Usually the speakers [at a public hearing] are an eclectic mix of
industry representatives, activists, academics, students, and even religious leaders. Although the EPA hearing yielded the
same mix of speakers, this time I noticed they were all wearing green Sierra Club "Climate Action Now" shirts. The reason for
this, I would later learn, was that the Sierra Club had mobilized hundreds of activists, transported them via bus (I presume of the
fossil-fuel powered kind), prepped their testimonies the night before, and completely dominated the morning speaker slots.

House
bill warns of EPA threat to fire hydrants . Reps. Bill Johnson (R-Ohio) and Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.) introduced legislation this
week to block an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule that would require fire hydrants to use lead-free pipes starting next year.
Johnson says that ruling would cause an immediate shortage of fire hydrants across the country, as any that are ready for installation
would not meet the EPA's new requirement.

EPA
Appoints Radical Activist as Head of 'Scientific Integrity'. Environmental Protection Agency administrator Gina McCarthy
yesterday [11/25/2013] appointed a top staffer with the environmental activist group Union of Concerned Scientists to serve as the
agency's top objective referee on scientific integrity issues. McCarthy's selection of Francesca Grifo raises troubling concerns
about EPA rushing headlong into anti-science environmental activism. Grifo led so-called scientific integrity efforts at the
Union of Concerned Scientists. While Grifo led such efforts, the UCS attempted to suppress scientific democracy and dissent,
expressing outrage that a Congressman who is skeptical of the UCS' asserted global warming crisis was allowed to be a member of the
House Science Committee.

EPA Chief: 'No More Urgent
Threat to Public Health Than Climate Change'. Ahead of her upcoming trip to China, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina
McCarthy told a liberal advocacy group in Washington on Monday that she has dedicated her life to protecting the environment: "And I really
see no greater issue and no more urgent threat to public health than climate change."

Backdoor gun control is here: no lead means no bullets.
The closedown [of the Doe Run Lead Smelter] is due to new extremely tight air quality restrictions placed on this specific plant. President Obama
and his EPA raised the regulations by 10 fold and it would have cost the plant $100 million to comply. In response to the Doe Run lead
smelter shutdown, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said the Doe Run Company "made a business decision" to shut down the smelter instead of
installing pollution control technologies needed to reduce sulfur dioxide and lead emissions as required by the Clean Air Act. Of course this is
why we need serious regulatory reform that precludes executive agency fiat, especially regulation implementation that exceeds a certain adverse financial
impact to a private sector business.

IG Report: EPA Employees
Get Slaps on the Wrist for Integrity Violations. Environmental Protection Agency employees received light punishments for
"employee integrity" violations and avoided prosecution when crimes allegedly occurred, according to the agency's inspector general.
The IG revealed a list of employee integrity violations that included assault, illegal possession of a weapon, and efforts to solicit
improper personal payments from agency contractors, among other violations. Many received light punishments for the offenses,
including ethics counseling, short leaves of absence, and informal discussions with supervisors.

Attorneys
General Join Forces to Call Into Account Illegal Obama Administration Violations. In Oklahoma, the EPA illegally usurped Oklahoma's authority
in the Clean Air Act to determine the state's own plan for addressing sources of emissions by imposing a federal implementation plan. The federal
plan goes beyond the authority granted to the EPA in the Clean Air Act and will result in a $2 billion cost to install technology needed to complete
the EPA plan and a permanent increase of 15-20 percent in the cost of electricity.

Bringing Abuses By EPA to a
Halt. Among President Barack Obama's first assaults in his war against the coal industry and reasonably priced electricity was an
Environmental Protection Agency action that was truly outrageous by almost any measure. During Obama's first term, the EPA overruled the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers' approval of a water discharge permit for a surface mine in West Virginia. The veto was retroactive, occurring
nearly four years after the Corps approved the permit.

The Power-Mad EPA. Recently the EPA ruled that
New York City had to replace 1,300 fire hydrants because of their lead content. The ruling was based on the Drinking Water Act passed by
Congress in 2011. As Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) pointed out while lambasting the agency, "I don't know a single New Yorker who goes
out to their fire hydrants every morning, turns it on, and brushes their teeth using the water from these hydrants. It makes no sense
whatsoever." Reportedly, the Senate is poised to consider legislation exempting fire hydrants if the EPA does not revise its ruling.
The EPA is not about making sense. It is about over-interpreting laws passed by Congress in ways that now continually lead to cases
before the Supreme Court.

EPA proposes restrictions for new wood
stoves. The federal Environmental Protection Agency has proposed new standards for wood stoves that would reduce the maximum amount of
fine particulate emissions allowed for new stoves sold in 2015 and 2019.

The Editor says...
If you're burning wood to stay warm (and alive), do you care about the quality of the smoke?

EPA overrides Congress, hands over
town to Indian tribes. Have you heard the story of the residents of Riverton, Wyo.? One day they were Wyomingans, the next they
were members of the Wind River tribes — after the Environmental Protection Agency declared the town part of the Wind River Indian
Reservation, undoing a 1905 law passed by Congress and angering state officials. The surprise decision was made by officials of the EPA,
the Department of Interior, and Department of Justice early last month, and has invoked the ire of Gov. Matt Mead, who has vowed not to honor
the agency's decision and is preparing to fight in court.

Ohio EPA
Proposes Phosphorus, Nitrogen Restrictions. The two main sources of phosphorus and nitrogen in Ohio waterways are
farming and sewage. Numeric nutrient restrictions will thus impose substantial new costs on farmers and municipal budgets.
When the U.S. EPA proposed similar restrictions in Florida in 2011, the state's Department of Agriculture estimated the restrictions
would cost the farming sector between $800 million and $1.6 billion every year. Other studies estimated annual costs
as high as $21 billion per year.

Sessions
Hammers EPA Administrator Unable to Defend Obama's Claims on Global Warming. In a Senate Environment and Public Works
Committee hearing Thursday [1/16/29014] on climate regulation, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) pressed EPA administrator Gina McCarthy to support
President Barack Obama's statements on global warming, which have been used to justify massive proposed administrative actions.
McCarthy was unable or unwilling to support the Obama's claims despite being the central figure crafting and implementing EPA regulations...
[Video clip]

Sen. Inhofe on
Obama's Global Warming Claims: 'The President Just Made that Up'. Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) told a Senate Environment and Public
Works (EPW) committee hearing today [1/16/2014] that the president must have fabricated two oft-repeated climate claims. "Both statements are false,"
Sen. Inhofe said of Obama's global warming claims, since neither the EPA nor the U.N. IPCC climate group can provide any supporting statistics.
"On multiple occasions, and most recently on May 30th of last year, President Obama has said, and this is a quote he has used several times, he
said that 'the temperature around the globe is increasing faster than was predicted even ten years ago' and that 'the climate is warming faster than
anybody anticipated five or ten years ago.'

EPA to Invalidate 30 Million Fuel Credits After
Fraud. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said it has invalidated 33.5 million renewable-fuel credits sold by an Indiana company for biofuel
it didn't produce, the fourth time the agency has alleged fraud in the program. The filing today [12/18/2013] follows fraud charges filed against the former
owners of the Indiana-based E-Biofuels LLC in September.

EPA Decree Shrinks Size of
Wyoming by a Million Acres. Why is the EPA altering state boundaries in Wyoming — and reversing over 100 years
of established law? Well, apparently the city of Riverton now falls under the jurisdiction of the Wind River Indian Reservation.
This, obviously, isn't sitting well with the governor's office — which is urging the EPA to reconsider its ruling and respect
the rule of law. [...] "This should be a concern to all citizens because, if the EPA can unilaterally take land away from a state, where
will it stop?" Governor Matt Mead said in a press release on January 6.

Idaho firm that
beat EPA in court now targeted by Army Corps of Engineers? Nearly two years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court smacked down the Environmental
Protection Agency in a landmark property rights case. The court ruled that the EPA was overstepping its bounds in going after the Sackett family
of Idaho. In 2007 the Sacketts wanted to build their dream home on their own land, but the EPA swept in and tried to stop them, arguing that their
land was a "wetland." It wasn't a wetland, the Sacketts tried to go to court to win their property rights back, but the EPA ruled that they had no
right even to defend themselves in court. The EPA staked out the position that the Sacketts could only deal with the EPA, which had already ruled
against them. The Supreme Court ultimately disagreed with the EPA, and the Sacketts won.

EPA Bans Most Wood
Burning Stoves In a Corrupt Scheme, Fireplaces Next. As of January 3rd, the EPA banned about 80% of the wood-burning stoves and
fireplace inserts in the United States. Stoves which are used to heat 12% of the homes in America and are especially needed in outlying
rural areas. Fireplaces are also being looked at. The EPA is attempting to reduce particle pollution with new rules. Instead
of limiting fine airborne particulate emissions to 15 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m³) of air, the change will impose a maximum
12 µg/m³ limit. [...] The draconian EPA regulations will be spread out, one will take place in March and the next in five to
eight years. Stoves currently in use will not be affected but obviously, getting them repaired will become more and more difficult.

Wyoming
officials prepare for court fight after EPA ruling hands land to tribes. Wyoming officials are gearing up for a potential court battle
against the Environmental Protection Agency as they try to reverse a sweeping agency ruling that transferred more than 1 million acres of
land — including an entire city of 10,000 — to Native American tribes. The dispute started in December when the EPA
ruled on a request from the Northern Arapaho and Eastern Shoshone tribes, which sought "state status" in order to administer air quality monitoring.

EPA Video
Contest Teaches Budding Child-Activists to Worry About 'Climate Change'. The Environmental Protection Agency is co-sponsoring
a "climate change video contest" that asks students, ages 11-14: "Why do you care about climate change?" And: "How are you
reducing carbon pollution or preparing for the impacts of climate change?" Students are advised to "be cool" and "be creative" in
explaining "how climate change affects you, your family, friends, and community, now or in the future" — and what they are doing to
"prepare for a changing climate." The Obama administration frequently uses video contests or "challenges" to advance its liberal
viewpoint on a variety of issues, and this is no exception.

Emails:
Another top EPA official used private email account to aid environmentalists. It pays to know people in charge, especially if they
are federal regulators. Emails suggest that an Environmental Protection Agency regional administrator used a private AOL email account to
correspond with environmentalists. Such email use is prohibited by agency rules and is seen as a way to skirt transparency requirements.
Emails show that EPA Region 2 Administrator Judith Enck gave advice to environmental activists, including securing government funding, getting
meetings with high-level officials and attending events.

EPA Officials Obstructed Fraud Investigation.
Several Environmental Protection Agency employees obstructed an investigation into the mismanagement that allowed a senior EPA official to bilk
taxpayers for nearly $900,000, the EPA Inspector General said in a letter to Sen. David Vitter (R., La.) released Wednesday [2/26/2014].
EPA employees threatened Inspector General investigators, refused to cooperate, and handed out non-disclosure agreements to other employees to
keep them from being interviewed, EPA Inspector General Arthur Elkins Jr. wrote in response to a request for information by Vitter on the case.

EPA finalizes new gasoline sulfur
limits. The Environmental Protection Agency on Monday set new limits on the amount of sulfur permitted in gasoline, capping
a lobbying battle that pitted the oil and refining industries against automakers and public health groups. The EPA's "Tier 3"
gasoline rule ratchets down sulfur content to 10 parts per million from 30. The agency said it would bring $13 in health
benefits for every dollar spent to comply with the standard, amounting to between $6.7 billion and $19 billion in annual
health benefits by 2030.

The Editor says...
Of course the EPA's rationale is all nonsense. How many people can tolerate exhaust fumes with a sulfur content of 10 parts
per million, but they get sick if it's 30 ppm? I'll answer that question: Nobody!

EPA 'Power
grab'? States fear precedent in Chesapeake Bay cleanup. Attorneys general in 21 states are fighting to block Environmental Protection
Agency pollution limits designed to improve the health of the Chesapeake Bay, fearing the Obama administration will use that authority to regulate
wetlands in their states. The attorneys general filed an amicus brief earlier this month in support of the American Farm Bureau Federation's
challenge to the cleanup plan, which aims to reduce pollutants and get the bay up to federal clean-water standards by 2025, the Atlanta
Journal-Constitution reported.

Culture of corruption in federal
bureaucracy. Evidence is accumulating of a corrupt bureaucratic culture in many, if not all, federal agencies. Revelations
of lavish meetings at fancy hotels, featuring stupid but expensive custom-made videos emerged in the last couple of years. But even worse,
cases of bureaucrats stealing from taxpayers by taking time off while still being paid high salaries have been reported recently, with their
supervisors knowingly turning a blind eye to the taxpayer rip-off. The EPA's highest-paid employee pretended to be a CIA agent and
defrauded the taxpayers of about $900,000 in salary and travel expenses (often first class airfare and five star hotels). But this
apparently was no isolated incident.

E.P.A. Set to Reveal Tough
New Sulfur Emissions Rule. The Environmental Protection Agency plans to unveil a major new regulation on Monday [3/3/2014]
that forces oil refiners to strip out sulfur, a smog-forming pollutant linked to respiratory disease, from American gasoline blends,
according to people familiar with the agency's plans. [...] The E.P.A. estimates that the new rule will drastically reduce soot and
smog in the United States, and thus rates of diseases associated with those pollutants, while slightly raising the price of both gasoline
and cars. The rule will require oil refiners to install expensive new equipment to clean sulfur out of gasoline and force automakers
to install new, cleaner-burning engine technology.

Audit
finds EPA workers used gov't-issued cards for dubious expenses. A government audit found employees from the Environment
Protection Agency used federally-issued charge cards to buy gym memberships, gift cards and other items that were either forbidden or
not even documented. The report by the office of the Inspector General faulted the agency for not keeping track of scores of
transactions made by employees authorized to use so-called "SmartPay" cards. It found more than half of $150,000 in expenditures
singled out for scrutiny was not in compliance with federal regulations.

Wyoming welder
faces $75,000 a day in EPA fines for building pond on his property. All Andy Johnson wanted to do was build a stock pond on
his sprawling eight-acre Wyoming farm. He and his wife Katie spent hours constructing it, filling it with crystal-clear water, and bringing
in brook and brown trout, ducks and geese. It was a place where his horses could drink and graze, and a private playground for his three
children. But instead of enjoying the fruits of his labor, the Wyoming welder says he was harangued by the federal government, stuck
in what he calls a petty power play by the Environmental Protection Agency. He claims the agency is now threatening him with civil
and criminal penalties — including the threat of a $75,000-a-day fine.

EPA
Wants to Slap $75K a Day Fine on Landowner Who Built Stock Pond on Own Property. Senators are trying to intervene on behalf of
a Wyoming landowner facing $75,000 a day in Environmental Protection Agency fines for building a stock pond on his own property. The
EPA compliance order against Andrew Johnson of Unita County claims that he violated the Clean Water Act by building a dam on a creek without
a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers. Johnson says it was a stock pond, which would make it exempt from CWA permitting requirements.
The EPA is telling him to restore the creek as it was or face penalties.

Anti-Science
Environmentalists Ban 'Neonic' Insecticides, Imperiling Global Health. Two recent pesticide bans in the EU — one
fully in effect, the other in the process of being phased in — could create massive new disincentives for further development
in this area. Both bans were politically motivated and instituted over the objection of independent scientists, and similar bans
are now being pushed by activists in the U.S. Should the EPA cave to political pressure, the long-term effect on global public
health could be devastating.

The Editor says...
The way I see it, the EPA is applying political pressure, in order to prolong its existence. They aren't
about to "cave to political pressure."

EPA
Issues Preemptive Report Attacking Alaska Mining Plan. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued a final
assessment of the environmental impacts of a hypothetical mine in southwest Alaska, claiming mining operations 200 miles
upstream from Bristol Bay would pose serious risks to salmon in the bay. EPA's initial and final assessments regarding
the site are the first time the agency has preemptively moved to discourage a potential mining operation before a mining
plan was submitted. EPA's final report also leaves little doubt the project will remain in limbo at least through the
duration of the Obama administration. Similar in tone and content to a controversial draft assessment EPA released in
May 2012, the agency's final assessment focuses much of its attention on a hypothetical mine's effects on sockeye salmon in
Bristol Bay.

Supreme
Court says regulatory law means whatever EPA says it means, today. On Monday, the [U.S. Supreme] Court
declined to accept an appeal from Arch Coal of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's reversal of its 2007 issuance
of a 2011 Clean Water Act permit for the company's Spruce Mine operation in West Virginia. By refusing to hear
the appeal, the court upheld EPA's authority to change its mind on a regulatory permit decision, even though doing so
inflicts substantial financial and other losses on appellants. The court's denial also creates a damaging new
regulatory uncertainty because it casts potential doubt on the legitimacy on any federal permitting decision, not just
those by EPA under the Clean Water Act.

EPA
land grab? Agency claims expanded authority over streams, wetlands. In what critics are
describing as a government land grab, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed a change Tuesday [3/25/2014]
to the Clean Water Act that would give it regulatory authority over temporary wetlands and waterways.
The proposal immediately sparked concerns that the regulatory power could extend into seasonal ponds, streams
and ditches, including those on private property.

EPA
Unveils 'Largest Expansion' of 'Authority to Regulate Private Property'. The Environmental Protection
Agency today unveiled its proposed rule to bring natural and man-made bodies of water big and tiny under the purview
of the Clean Water Act, sparking accusations that the administration has embarked on an unprecedented breach of
private property rights without scientific basis. This launches a "robust outreach effort" to gather input
in shaping a final rule over the next 90 days, the EPA said, maintaining that the rulemaking isn't
groundbreaking but a clarification effort needed to clearly define streams and wetlands protection after
Supreme Court decisions in 2001 and 2006.

House
Republicans lay into EPA 'land grab'. The Environmental Protection Agency says a rule it proposed
this week merely clarifies its existing authority over the nation's waterways. Republicans say it's "the
biggest land grab in the history of the world," as House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers, R-Ky.,
called it. There is some certainty about the EPA's rule defining the waters of the United States —
the buzz it has generated is not going away any time soon. The EPA, in conjunction with the Army Corps of
Engineers, says the proposed rule would clarify which streams, rivers, wetlands and other waterways are within
its regulatory jurisdiction. It would bring a majority of those waterways under EPA control, which drew backlash
from conservatives and industry groups.

The Editor says...
That doesn't do much for Obama's claim of the most open and transparent administration in history.

Obama
EPA To Regulate Bovine Emissions. It's our lust for cheeseburgers that's dooming the planet through
climate change, the Obama administration said in a Climate Action Plan released Friday [3/28/2014] that
seeks to save us all from ruminant livestock. Having already blamed the Industrial Revolution
for what we used to call weather and temperatures that have flat-lined for 15 years, the White House is
now targeting American agriculture abundance by slashing methane emissions from cows by 25% by 2020.

Obama is the coming Revolution.
At this stage of the Fundamental Transformation of America, the wake up call should be glaringly obvious.
The administration controls the 'news'. They control the narrative. They call the shots. They
do the branding and the smearing with the name-calling they intend to make stick. While various agencies
under the control of the administration paint patriots as dissidents, the EPA, their lead agency for change, has
been using Americans — including children — as lab rats. [...] There are 435 congressman
and 100 senators in Washington, DC but not one of them has exposed the deadly secret of the modern-day EPA.
And it is not just the EPA that Congress has been allowing to get by in the dark. The news is managed the
minute it happens — and often even before.

Obama
administration faces backlash on proposed wood stove regulations. A federal proposal
requiring more efficiency from wood-burning stoves has ignited a debate between the Obama administration
and lawmakers who oppose the new regulations, arguing the rules impose an unfair burden on people in
remote areas. The Environmental Protection Agency proposed a rule changes in January that would
dramatically tighten emissions requirements on new wood-powered heaters, though does not impact ones
already in homes. The EPA estimates that as much as 13 percent of all soot pollution in
the U.S. is a result of inefficient wood-fired stoves and boilers.

The Editor says...
When a "problem" of this sort is announced, it should be met with a unanimous cry of, "So what?"
When you stoke a fire in a pot-belly stove to keep your house (or cabin) warm, do you care if it's inefficient?
Do you care if the area around your house smells like wood smoke? Do you care if the chimney exceeds
some bureaucrat's arbitrary standard for particulate emissions? Of course not. That's
because, for thousands of years, people have been willing to tolerate smoky air if it means they will
stay warm.

GOP
lawmakers push EPA to ax proposed water rule amid outcry from farmers. More than a dozen Republican
lawmakers are pushing the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider asserting regulatory authority over streams
and wetlands amid intense backlash from farm groups over the agency's proposed water rule. In a letter Thursday
[4/3/2014], the GOP senators faulted the EPA for announcing a proposed rule last week before the government's peer-reviewed
scientific assessment was fully complete. They are calling on the government to withdraw the rule or give the
public six months to review it, rather than the three months being provided.

EPA's
secret gas chamber experiments: A deceitful failure. A man — we'll call him "Subject
No. 1" — had a clear plastic pipe stuck into his mouth with his lips sealed around it, while the
diesel exhaust from a parked truck outside the gas chamber was mixed with particulate matter and pumped straight
into his lungs. The pumped mixture level was 135 times the mean diesel truck emissions exposure in the
United States.

The
Mengele EPA. The Environmental Protection Agency has been deliberately exposing people —
including children — with asthma and other health issues to pollution to justify ever-more-stringent
air quality standards. 'Improvements to EPA Policies and Guidance Could Enhance Protection of Human Study
Subjects," released by the EPA's Office of Inspector General on March 31, confirms that the agency "exposed
81 human study subjects to concentrated airborne particles or diesel exhaust emissions in five EPA studies
conducted during 2010 and 2011." According to the report, obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation, the
human subjects, said to have given their "informed consent," were exposed to levels of pollutants up to 50 times
greater than the EPA itself says is safe for humans. And there are questions as to how informed that consent was.

Obama
and the EPA Know No Bounds With Regard To Climate Change. It seems that the EPA conducted five experiments
in 2010 and 2011 on people with health issues such as asthma and heart problems, and on the elderly. The experiments
exposed people to dangerously high levels of toxic pollutants, including diesel exhaust fumes. Diesel exhaust fumes
contains forty toxic air contaminants, including nineteen that are known carcinogens, and particulant matter [PM].
The EPA has publicly warned of the dangers of PM. An EPA document from 2003 that says short-term exposure to PM can
result in heart attacks and arrhythmias for people with heart disease. It further states that long-term exposure
can result in reduced lung function and even death.

Massive,
$1.7 billion environmental cleanup of Passaic River proposed by EPA. In one of the
largest Superfund cleanups ever proposed, federal officials yesterday called for a bank-to-bank
dredging of the Passaic River that would remove more than 4 million cubic yards of toxic sediment
from the river bottom — enough to fill up MetLife Stadium twice. The 1.7 billion cleanup,
under study for 25 years, would target the lower eight miles of the highly polluted waterway, from
Belleville to Newark, which remains heavily contaminated with high concentrations of dioxin, PCBs
and other contaminants left behind by more than a century of industrial activity.

The EPA's
Science Problem. In a stunning admission, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Administrator Gina McCarthy revealed to House Science, Space and Technology Committee chairman Lamar
Smith (R-TX) that the agency neither possesses, nor can produce, all of the scientific data used to
justify the rules and regulations they have imposed on Americans via the Clean Air Act. In short,
science has been trumped by the radical environmentalist agenda. The admission follows the issuance
of a subpoena by the full Committee last August. It was engendered by two years of EPA stonewalling,
apparently aimed at preventing the raw data cited by EPA as the scientific foundation for those rules
and regulations from being independently verified.

Will EPA water
grab tip US back into recession? Consider the bureaucratic meaning of the term "waters of the United States,"
which is the rubric under which the U.S. federal government establishes jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act. [...]
While Websters may only need 85 words to do the job — and even the Clean Water Act's author, Edmund
Muskie, needed only 88 pages for the entire bill — EPA's definition of water runs 370 pages.
And that's leaving aside appendices, one of which is a hefty 300 pages in its own right. The new catchphrase
is "connectivity:" Forget whether waters are navigable; what matters now for EPA's would-be rulemakers is that
disparate bodies of water are connected ecologically, demonstrating a "significant nexus." This includes
"ephemeral waterways" — translation: ditches and even potholes that sometimes collect rainwater
or storm runoff will now fall under EPA authority.

Save the Environment — from the
EPA. Saving the Environment has become all about making money with bogus claims that man-made
global warming is well on its way to destroying Mother Earth. Saving the Environment long ago left
rampant pollution behind for government-sponsored 'scientists' to chase down C02, a necessary component
for healthy plant life. All scientists using science and truth to point out that man-made global
warming is a hoax are labeled "deniers" and threatened with prison.

The Editor says...
Enough of this Mother Earth nonsense. The earth is not my mother. I have been given
dominion over the earth [Genesis 1:26].

EPA Paid Nearly $500K in
Unauthorized Bonuses. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) paid out nearly $500,000 in unauthorized
bonuses, according to a report released by the EPA Inspector General Friday [5/2/2014]. An Inspector General (IG)
investigation found that 11 EPA employees received $481,819 in unauthorized retention bonuses between 2006 and 2013.
The bonuses are meant to incentivize employees who receive other job offers. The bonuses are supposed to be
reauthorized annually, but for 10 of those EPA officials, the IG could find no evidence that their bonuses were
reviewed, as required by federal regulations and EPA policies.

Half
of EPA office's passports are missing, IG finds. Almost half of the passports issued to the
Environmental Protection Agency's employees are missing, according to the EPA's inspector general.
Official and diplomatic passports issued to EPA employees, as well as other sensitive personal identifiable
information, could be compromised as a result, the inspector general said in a report. Of
417 passports issued to Office of International and Tribal Affairs employees, 199 could not be
located, the report said.

EPA accused
of tolerating rampant employee misconduct, obstructing probes. The EPA was accused Wednesday [5/7/2014] of
tolerating waste, fraud and "criminal conduct" in its own ranks, as a House committee hearing aired allegations of employee
misconduct that have cost taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars. The inspector general's office —
the official watchdog tasked with overseeing the agency — also claims it's being blocked from doing its job
by a unit within the EPA. "I'm very concerned that vital information regarding suspected employee misconduct is
being withheld from the OIG," Patrick Sullivan, assistant inspector general, testified before the House Oversight and
Government Reform Committee.

EPA
accused of blocking independent investigations. A unit run by President Barack Obama's political
staff inside the Environmental Protection Agency operates illegally as a "rogue law enforcement agency" that
has blocked independent investigations by the EPA's inspector general for years, a top investigator told Congress.

EPA
Employees Not Fired For Watching Pornography, Stealing Money. The Environmental Protection
Agency has not been firing employees for watching pornography and falsifying federal documents, according
to California Republican Rep. Darrell Issa. "How much pornography would it take for an EPA employee
to lose his job?" Issa asked EPA officials, including the agency's second-in-command, testifying before the
House Oversight Committee. Issa chairs the committee. "This individual spent four consecutive
hours on a site called 'sadism is beautiful,'" Issa pressed the EPA employees. "You are running an
organization from which no one can get fired."

Extreme Pornography Agency. An
Environmental Protection Agency official spent up to six hours a day on the taxpayer dime looking at pornography,
according to the EPA Inspector General. Allan Williams, the deputy assistant inspector general for investigations,
told the House Oversight Committee Wednesday that his office had discovered an EPA official who habitually watched porn
on a government computer.

'How much pornography would it take for an EPA employee to lose their job?'
A congressional committee grilled leaders of the Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday following reports that an agency employee
confessed to spending between two and six hours per day viewing pornography on his government-issued computer during work hours.
Witnesses in the House Oversight and Government Reform committee hearing confirmed that the worker, whose name has not been disclosed,
is still receiving his $120,000 salary and continues to have access to EPA computers. When an investigator went to interview him,
he was at his desk surfing sexually explicit websites.

EPA Chief Promises To Go After Republicans Who Question Agency Science.
Environmental Protection Agency administrator Gina McCarthy has issued a warning to Republicans who continue to
question the integrity of the agency's scientific data: we're coming for you. McCarthy told an
audience at the National Academy of Sciences on Monday morning the agency will go after a "small but vocal
group of critics" who are arguing the EPA is using "secret science" to push costly clean air regulations.
"Those critics conjure up claims of EPA secret science — but it's not really about EPA science or secrets.
It's about challenging the credibility of world renowned scientists and institutions like Harvard University and
the American Cancer Society," McCarthy said, according to Politico.

EPA
Awarded Nearly $500,000 In Improper Bonuses. Retention bonuses are payments or
rewards outside of an employee's salary that are used as an incentive to keep the employee in their
current position. According to Investopedia, the bonuses have been used during mergers and
acquisitions, or to decrease corporate poaching.

EPA's
next target in fight against climate change: cooking stoves. The Obama
administration's war on climate change may soon be moving inside the kitchen. Environmental
Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy is set to unveil Tuesday [5/27/2014] six federal grants to
universities to fund research on clean cooking-stove technology. The announcement will put the
EPA's resources squarely behind a United Nations' quest for cleaner burning stoves and an end to
deadly cooking pollution.

The Editor says...
"Deadly cooking pollution" sounds like a problem that would quickly fix itself:
Those who use the fuels and the techniques that prove fatal would soon be extinct.
But you can bet nothing like this happens in the United States, and clearly it is a waste
of our tax dollars to remedy other countries' problems.

Official
on key EPA fracking advisory board has suspect degree. An official on the
Environmental Protection Agency's hydraulic fracturing scientific advisory board got a doctorate
degree from an unaccredited, shuttered online correspondence school that congressional auditors
targeted a decade ago in an investigation into diploma mills. The advisory board member is listed
as Dr. Connie Schreppel in EPA records, which highlight her doctorate from Kennedy Western
University and a master's from Greenwich University.

Ethanol and
MTBE — Should EPA Be Abolished? [Scroll down] The role of EPA in this unnecessary disaster — which
polluted ground water in 49 states and placed 100 million people at risk — should be reason
enough to abolish EPA and end the myth that government regulations on balance improve our
environment. MTBE has been identified as cancer-causing in rat studies that are comparable to the
kind of rat studies that EPA has used to attack all sorts of food additives and agricultural
chemicals, but EPA raised no alarm about this regarding MTBE. When EPA declares industry to be the
culprit in allegedly cancer-causing chemicals, it demands immediate correct action — but when EPA
itself is the guilty party, it takes many years before something is done.

US sets up honey bee loss task force. The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and the agriculture department will lead the effort, which includes $8m (£4.7m) for new honey bee habitats.
Bee populations saw a 23% decline last winter, a trend blamed on the loss of genetic diversity, exposure to certain pesticides and other
factors. A quarter of the food Americans eat, including apples, carrots and avocados, relies on pollination.

EPA in Contempt
for Destroying Computer Files. According to an Associated Press report, a federal
judge has held the EPA in contempt for destroying computer files sought after by a conservative
group: Landmark Legal Foundation. It's taken more than 13 years. U.S. District
Judge Royce Lamberth had ordered the EPA on Jan. 19, 2001, at the end of the Clinton administration,
to preserve all documents relevant to a Freedom of Information Act request by Landmark regarding the
federal agency's contact with outside groups. That same day, EPA Administrator Carol Browner asked
a technician to delete her computer files. Browner later testified that she was unaware of the
court order and simply wanted to remove some games from her work computer. According to AP, EPA
officials later admitted wiping clean the computer files from Browner and other top staff despite
Lamberth's order. In finding the EPA in contempt this week, Judge Lamberth ordered the agency to
pay Landmark's legal fees. That means that ultimately taxpayers foot the bill for the EPA's
misconduct.

The EPA Overreaches
Again. Back in 1972, when Congress passed the Clean Water Act (CWA), the EPA was
given jurisdiction over discharges from "point sources" like factories into the "navigable waters"
of the United States. Jurisdiction over the majority of U.S. water and land was left to state and
local governments. By the 1980s the EPA was claiming jurisdiction over any spot a migratory bird
might land. According to the EPA, a wandering goose established the needed link between actual
navigable waters and waters far removed from Congress's intent. In what was piquantly called the
glancing goose test, if a goose paused during migration at any body of water, no matter how
temporary, it was deemed a water of the U.S. and thus covered by the CWA.

New
EPA Regs Issued Under Obama Are 38 Times as Long as Bible. Since President Barack
Obama took office on Jan. 20, 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued 2,827 new
final regulations, equaling 24,915 pages in the Federal Register, totaling approximately 24,915,000
words. The Gutenberg Bible is only 1,282 pages and 646,128 words. Thus, the new EPA regulations
issued by the Obama Administration contain 19 times as many pages as the Bible and 38 times as many words.

What
Is the EPA Hiding From the Public? The climate is changing and, yes, humans play a
role. But that does not mean, as Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy would
have us believe, that the debate — over how much the climate is changing, how big a role
humans play, and what can reasonably done about it — is over. Still less does it mean
that anyone who questions her agency's actions, particularly the confidential research it uses to
justify multimillion and billion-dollar air rules, is a denier at war with science.

Now
EPA says it can't find emails requested by Congress because of hard drive crash. Does
the federal government have any systems at all to back its email archives? Maybe not, because the
Environmental Protection Agency is now using the same excuse as the IRS is using in response to a
Congressional subpoena: the computer ate our homework. In a hearing Wednesday [6/25/2014] before
the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said the agency was
still trying to recover the emails from a now-retired employee who was involved in a controversial EPA
evaluation of a proposed mine project in Alaska's Bristol Bay.

EPA
Chief: Costly 'Clean Power Plan' Gives Americans 'More Opportunities to Reduce Waste'. The
sweeping EPA plan announced earlier this month sets carbon-reduction targets for each state, then allows
states to decide how to meet those targets, either on their own or in partnership with other states.
McCarthy said many states will choose the most "cost-effective strategy," which is to reduce consumer
demand for electricity: But that means raising the cost of electricity, Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.)
told McCarthy: "EPA has said the rule will not increase the cost of electricity, but under this
proposed rule, the cost of electricity per kilowatt hour will actually increase. Isn't that correct?"

The EPA is America's
Other Enemy. While our attention is focused on events in the Middle East, a domestic
enemy of the nation is doing everything in its power to kill the provision of electricity to the
nation and, at the same time, to control every drop of water in the United States, an attack on its
agricultural sector. That enemy is the Environmental Protection Agency. Like the rest of the
Obama administration, it has no regard for real science and continues to reinterpret the Clean Air
and Clean Water Acts. It has an agenda that threatens every aspect of life in the nation.

EPA moves on green
refrigerants. The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday proposed federal approval
of climate-friendly refrigerants used in household air conditioners and refrigerators, as part of
President Obama's quest to counter global warming.

The Editor says...
Global warming stopped, all by itself, in 1997.
Obama's "quest" is to bring capitalism to a halt, by using unnecessary regulations as his weapons.

EPA
spends $1.6 million on hotel for 'Environmental Justice' conference. The
Environmental Protection Agency will spend more than $1 million on hotel accommodations for an
"Environmental Justice" conference this fall. The agency posted its intention to contract with
the Renaissance Arlington Local Capital View Hotel for its upcoming public meeting, for which it
will need to book 195 rooms for 24 days.

Dramatic
NASA satellite images show our air getting cleaner. If Americans are breathing easier
than they were a decade ago, these new NASA satellite images may help explain why. They
show — in vividly color-coded maps — that levels of nitrogen dioxide, an
important air pollutant, have plummeted across the country over the last decade.

The Editor says...
That's all very nice, and it proves that the EPA's work is finished, so we can get rid of the EPA now.
But why was this a NASA project rather than a NOAA project?

Republicans:
EPA Rule Could Ruin Fourth Of July. While Americans get ready for the thousands of
fireworks shows that will be occurring across the country this weekend, Republicans are warning
that pending federal water regulations could ruin fireworks displays next year. The Environmental
Protection Agency is trying to expand its authority under the Clean Water Act. Republicans warn
that the agency's proposal to expand the definition of "waters of the United States" could allow
the EPA to regulate bodies of water on private property. Republicans are now warning that EPA
water rules could threaten fireworks by allowing environmental activists to sue and shut down shows
across the country.

The Week That Was. [I]n
its questionable finding that carbon dioxide emissions endanger public health and welfare, the EPA
claimed its findings are supported by science and cited three lines of evidence. [#1] EPA claims a
distinct human fingerprint — a hot spot in the atmosphere centered over the tropics at
about 10 kilometers (33,000 feet). This hot spot may not exist. Satellites and
weather balloons have failed to find it. [#2] EPA claims late 20th century surface
global warming was unprecedented and dangerous. It was not. A similar warming occurred in the
early 20th century, which was not associated with carbon dioxide. The late 20th century
surface warming stopped over 16 years ago. [#3] EPA claims climate models are reliable.
Climate models failed to predict that global warming would stop and greatly exaggerate the warming over
the past 30 plus years.

What
Is the EPA Hiding From the Public? The EPA's regulatory process today is a closed
loop. The agency funds the scientific research it uses to support its regulations, and it picks the
supposedly independent (but usually agency- funded) scientists to review it. When the regulations
are challenged, the courts defer to the agency on scientific issues. But the agency refuses to make
public the scientific research it uses.

Panning
in protest: Activists mine for gold in defiance of EPA regs. The American West was settled in part by gold miners exploring a new
frontier, and now modern-day prospectors are fighting to keep that tradition alive. A group of miners began illegally dredging for gold
this week in Idaho's Salmon River to challenge what they call federal government overreach into the waterway, Reuters reported. They are
protesting regulations by the EPA that forbid suction dredging and other mining in the river in order to protect the habitat of endangered fish.

The EPA Is Drafting A Rule To
Claim Control Over Local Waterways Like Ditches And Streams. The Environmental Protection Agency is planning to
expand its jurisdiction over the nation's waterways under the Clean Water Act to include ditches, small streams, ponds, and
other purely local waterways. Nearly 204,000 comments have been received since the rule was proposed on April 21,
2014, mostly from Americans opposed to it. Ten U.S. senators also sent a letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy
expressing their concerns about the proposed rule changes. Among the examples of potential overreach the senators
cite are attempts by environmentalists to ban fireworks at Lake Tahoe along the border of California and Nevada. The
senators fear the expanded EPA jurisdiction could led to similar lawsuits in other places.

Boeing
fears regulatory wave amid battle over fish, water pollution. At the heart of the
fight, which could impact thousands of jobs, is a peculiar question: How much locally caught fish do
Washingtonians eat, and what are the health risks? Green groups, alone with Washington state
tribes, have sued the Environmental Protection Agency to push for increased fish consumption
rates — currently set at six-and-a-half grams a day. If the number is set higher, it
would trigger tougher standards on toxins flowing into the Puget Sound.

Power
grab: EPA wants to garnish wages of polluters. The Environmental Protection Agency has
quietly floated a rule claiming authority to bypass the courts and unilaterally garnish paychecks of
those accused of violating its rules, a power currently used by agencies such as the Internal
Revenue Service. The EPA has been flexing its regulatory muscle under President Obama, collecting
more fines each year and hitting individuals with costly penalties for violating environmental
rules, including recently slapping a $75,000 fine on Wyoming homeowner Andy Johnson for building a
pond on his rural property. "The EPA has a history of overreaching its authority. It seems like
once again the EPA is trying to take power it doesn't have away from American citizens," Sen. John
Barrasso, Wyoming Republican, said when he learned of the EPA's wage garnishment scheme. Others
questioned why the EPA decided to strengthen its collection muscle at this time. Critics said the
threat of garnishing wages would be a powerful incentive for people to agree to expensive settlements
rather than fight EPA charges.

Rep.
Campbell: Government, IRS, EPA Are 'The Police State'. Rep. John Campbell (R-Calif.)
called the government, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) "the police state" at a Financial Services Committee hearing at the Capitol on Thursday [7/10/2014].
At the July 10 hearing, Legislation to Reform the Federal Reserve on Its 100-year Anniversary, the
Federal Reserve Accountability and Transparency Act (HR 5018) was discussed, legislation which would
require "the Federal Reserve to provide the Congress with a clear rule to describe the course of
monetary policy." The act would also require the Fed to conduct cost-benefit analysis, require
transparency on bank stress tests and international financial regulatory negotiations, and would
order the Fed to disclose the salaries of highly paid employees.

EPA
Regulations Killing Family-Owned Peach Orchards. Environmental Protection Agency
regulations banning the use of the chemical methyl bromide since 2005 are threatening peach orchards
in Louisiana, Watchdog reports. Joe Mitchin's family-owned business of peach orchards in northern
Louisiana is slowly dying off. Orchard owners traditionally use methyl bromide to treat diseased
peach trees, but owing to the advent of EPA regulations in 2005, Mitchin has been unable to treat
his orchard, leading to a steady decline in production. The destruction of peach trees has forced
Mitchin to downsize his company, laying off 40 employees, according to Watchdog. Business expenses
are difficult to cover, and so the orchard, which was founded in 1946 as a family operation, will
face no other choice than to close its doors in the next few years.

EPA
has no business garnishing wages without due process. It took Mike and Chantell
Sackett five years and a unanimous Supreme Court decision just to gain a fighting chance against a
thuggish Environmental Protection Agency. Officials appeared at their Idaho property in 2007
threatening them with fines of $37,500 per day unless they immediately stopped construction on their
dream home on land they owned near a lake. The agency cited the Clean Water Act after a neighbor
complained, perhaps upset at the prospect of another home being built in the well-developed
neighborhood. There are dozens of adjacent homes, multiple piers on the lake and even a
well-trafficked marina close at hand. The Sacketts' property already had a sewer hookup.
The agency not only threatened to ruin the Sacketts, but also insisted they could nothing to contest
the agency's actions.

Lawmakers
move to block EPA wage-garnishing rule. Lawmakers pushed back Tuesday against the Environmental Protection
Agency's move to garnish the paychecks of accused polluters, advancing a bill that would block the new authority.
The House Committee on Appropriations approved the countermeasure as a policy rider on a $30.2 billion spending bill
for natural resources agencies, including the EPA, the Interior Department and U.S. Forest Service. The amendment
by Rep. Tom Graves, Georgia Republican, passed the committee in a voice vote, signaling an absence of strong opposition, if not
support for prohibiting the EPA from claiming authority to garnish wages to collect fines and penalties without a court order.

Update:EPA
pulls back from plan to garnish paychecks. The Environmental Protection Agency bowed
to fierce criticism Wednesday [7/16/2014] and announced that it had hit the breaks on a fast-tracked plan to
collect fines by garnishing paychecks of accused polluters. The agency, which has come under
withering attacks from Republican lawmakers for attempting a "power grab," said it still intended to
pursue the new authority to garnish wages without a court order. But now it will follow a more
typical and longer review process.

A Government
Feared and Distrusted. ## The proposed regulations are so onerous, they could literally make
farming of some areas impossible. But if you don't comply, the EPA could label you a "polluter" whose
wages should be garnished. Case example: the agency has threatened fines of up to $75,000 per
day on Wyoming homeowner Andy Johnson. He built a pond on his rural property. Think twice before
you build that koi pond in your own backyard — or collect rain water on your property, like Gary Harrington,
an Oregonian now serving a 30-day sentence for violating water regulations. An encyclopedia would be
required to list all the examples of executive and governmental agency overreach. But note the theme:
the examples above are violations of Americans trust by non-elected governmental agencies. You, Joe Average,
have no say in what is decreed. You are not represented when thousands of regulations are enacted.

EPA
Chief: 'This Is Not About Pollution Control... It's an Investment Strategy'. EPA
Administrator Gina McCarthy told Congress on Wednesday [7/23/2014] that the EPA's sweeping
carbon-regulation plan "really is an investment opportunity. This is not about pollution control."
Spouting warnings about "climate change" ("The science is clear. The risks are clear... We must
act."), McCarthy described and defended the EPA's plan to reduce pollution from existing power plants
by setting various carbon-reduction goals for each state to meet by the year 2030.

Mark
Levin Takes Obama's EPA to Task in Court. Talk radio's Mark Levin is in a legal knife
fight with Barack Obama's Environmental Protection Agency and may have the EPA by the throat in what
would be a humiliation for the Obama White House. Levin is a talk radio giant and conservative
hero ("The Great One," as Sean Hannity describes him). But he's also actually a lawyer, who served
as chief of staff to a leader held in the highest reverence by conservatives, Attorney General Edwin
Meese. And Levin continues to litigate through Landmark Legal Foundation, where he is president.

The EPA is America's
Other Enemy. While our attention is focused on events in the Middle East, a domestic
enemy of the nation is doing everything in its power to kill the provision of electricity to the
nation and, at the same time, to control every drop of water in the United States, an attack on its
agricultural sector. That enemy is the Environmental Protection Agency. Like the rest of the
Obama administration, it has no regard for real science and continues to reinterpret the Clean Air
and Clean Water Acts. It has an agenda that threatens every aspect of life in the nation.

EPA
Fast Becoming The Green IRS. The EPA authoritarian edicts include recently slapping a
$75,000 a day — yes, a day — fine on Wyoming homeowner Andy Johnson for building
a pond on his rural property to provide water for his cattle where the Six Mile Creek runs across his
land. The EPA, our environmental judge, jury and enforcer, declared that the Johnson family was
in violation of the Clean Water Act. The EPA charged the Johnsons with "the discharge of pollutants
(i.e., dredged or fill material) into the waters of the United States" for building a dam without getting
a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers. According to the EPA, Johnson needed a permit not just
from the state of Wyoming, which he had, but also from the Corps of Engineers because Six Mile Creek runs
into Black Forks River, which runs into the Green River — a "navigable, interstate water of the
United States." By that definition, average Americans could be fined for washing their cars in
their driveways.

It's the highest compliment any politician can receive from the EPA.EPA
to Republicans: You're making it 'very difficult' to do our job. EPA Deputy Administrator Bob Perciasepe
said he is trying to "build a bridge" with Republicans. "I can tell you my boss [EPA Administrator] Gina McCarthy
would want nothing more than to build credibility with Congress," Perciasepe said during a hearing at the House Small
Business Committee. Perciasepe plans to leave the EPA next month, but before he takes off he has been making
the rounds in Congress, offering to patch things up with Republicans who are wary of the agency. But this comes
as little comfort to many Republicans, who are skeptical of the EPA's new Waters of the U.S. rule, fearing it could
lead to a massive power grab over farmland.

The Editor says...
The tyrants at the EPA say the Republicans are making their jobs difficult. They are lucky to have jobs.

Feds
raid S.C. home to seize Land Rover in EPA emission-control crackdown. When it comes to environmental regulation
compliance, the Department of Homeland Security isn't playing — as evidenced by a recent federal raid of a South
Carolinian's home to confiscate a Land Rover that violated EPA emission rules. Jennifer Brinkley said she saw a line
of law enforcement vehicles approaching her home and wondered what was wrong, the local WBTV reported. Homeland
Security agents then went to her 1985 Land Rover Defender and lifted the hood. "They popped up the hood and
looked at the Vehicle Identification Number and compared it with a piece of paper and then took the car with them," she
said, WBTV reported.

Homeland
Security Seizing Cars That Violate EPA Standards. Jennifer Brinkley of North Carolina says when saw a line of
law enforcement vehicles coming up her driveway earlier this month she didn't know what to think. "I haven't done anything
wrong." According to WBTV, the Homeland Security agents were not there to take her away, they were looking for illegally
imported Land Rover Defenders.

The
Environmental Corruption Agency. The lofty motto of the Environmental Protection
Agency is "protecting people and the environment." In practice, however, EPA bureaucrats faithfully
protect their own people and preserve the government's cesspool of manipulation, cover-ups and
cronyism. Just last week, Mark Levin and his vigilant Landmark Legal Foundation went to court to
ask federal district judge Royce Lamberth to sanction the EPA "for destroying or failing to preserve
emails and text messages that may have helped document suspected agency efforts to influence the
2012 presidential election."

EPA
chief: Teach climate change in schools. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) chief Gina McCarthy said students
should be taught the science behind climate change in schools. "I think part of the challenge of explaining climate change
is that it requires a level of science and a level of forward thinking and you've got to teach that to kids," McCarthy said in
an interview with the magazine Irish American published Friday [8/8/2014].

Cooperation
or Coercion on Climate: Is the EPA Trying to Deputize the States? It has been argued
that EPA's recently announced carbon emissions rule is just the latest attempt to draw states into
the implementation of its regulations. [...] But Texas's fight to resist being drawn into implementing
EPA's greenhouse gas regulations suggests that federal "encouragement" can be deeply coercive, employing
penalties against the state's economy that courts have no doctrine to account for.

Groups
to EPA: Stop muzzling science advisers. Journalist and scientific organizations accused the
Environmental Protection Agency on Tuesday [8/12/2014] of attempting to muzzle its independent scientific
advisers by directing them to funnel all outside requests for information through agency officials.

EPA
is declared a 'rogue agency'. The U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency was founded with
much fanfare and good will in 1970, when green thinking and eco-mindedness was a righteous thing
indeed. Now the EPA is deemed "a rogue agency" that has outlived its purpose and "should be
dismantled and replaced." So says the Heartland Institute, a Chicago-based nonprofit that
has a plan on how to do just that.

EPA
tells new students: Only 1 napkin, 1 salt packet, 1 ketchup pouch at school lunches.
For many students, the unwelcome return to school is often sweetened with a shopping trip for school
supplies and new clothes. Not anymore. As college, high school and grade school students begin
returning to classes, the Environmental Protection Agency is urging students to use recycled
material, even garbage, for their supplies and to shop at thrift stores for "retro fashions."
And don't even think about taking more than one napkin or salt packet in the lunch line.

Blueprint
for water 'control'? Pol says EPA made secret maps for new regulatory push. A top
House Republican is charging that the Environmental Protection Agency secretly drafted highly
detailed maps of U.S. waterways to set the stage for a controversial plan to expand regulatory power
over streams and wetlands, a claim the EPA strongly denies. Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, chairman
of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, released those maps on Wednesday, while
firing off a letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy voicing concerns over why they were created
in the first place.

EPA
developed secret map to claim oversight of puddles, ponds, and farm runoff. A map
developed by the EPA and released to a U.S. House committee investigating controversial proposed
water regulations should have citizens concerned, says U.S. Rep. Kevin Cramer. [...] "It is
certainly alarming the EPA would develop these maps in secret and only release them after being
confronted by members of Congress," Cramer, a Republican, said in a news release accompanying his
office's release of the maps. "The EPA has been hiding information which could upset the public and
jeopardize its massive power grab of unprecedented authority over private and public water."

If
only EPA stood for 'Enough Protection Already'. The air we breathe is also cleaner than it's
been for 60 years. In a rational world, environmental bureaucrats would now say, "Mission
accomplished. We set tough standards, so we don't need to keep doing more.

EPA Fakes Regulatory Cost-Benefit
Calculations. When pressed about the staggering increases in regulatory burden under his administration, President
Obama says not to worry because the benefits exceed the costs. But a new and revealing set of charts from the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce highlights the shameless deception used to calculate the bulk of these purported benefits. In Charting Federal Costs
and Benefits, Chamber researchers analyzed the benefits calculations of the Environmental Protection Agency, which is responsible
for the largest portion of the most costly regulations in recent years. What they found obliterates the president's claims
that sky-high regulatory costs are justified.

Could
the EPA Chief Really be 'Worse than Lois Lerner'? A new court ruling may force more transparency out of the
Environmental Protection Agency. That's the hope of Chris Horner, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
He points out the EPA has been involved with false identification in e-mail accounts, conducted agency business on private e-mail
accounts and is now being held accountable for destroying thousands of public records in the form of text messages. Horner goes
so far as to say EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy is "worse than Lois Lerner," the central figure in the Internal Revenue Service targeting
scandal. "I don't think any agency can compare with this agency," Horner told TheBlaze, regarding the EPA. "For once, the
EPA has been told it cannot do whatever it wants to do under the law. That is news."

EPA Fakes Regulatory Cost-Benefit
Calculations. When pressed about the staggering increases in regulatory burden under his administration, President
Obama says not to worry because the benefits exceed the costs. But a new and revealing set of charts from the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce highlights the shameless deception used to calculate the bulk of these purported benefits. In Charting Federal Costs
and Benefits, Chamber researchers analyzed the benefits calculations of the Environmental Protection Agency, which is responsible
for the largest portion of the most costly regulations in recent years. What they found obliterates the president's claims
that sky-high regulatory costs are justified.

House passes bill to halt EPA water
rule. The House passed legislation Tuesday [9/9/2014] that would prevent the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from implementing
a proposed rule to define its jurisdiction over bodies of water. Passed 262-152, the bill would prohibit the EPA from using the proposal for
any rulemaking regarding the Clean Water Act.

EPA
takes step toward regulating plane emissions. New greenhouse gas emission regulations
for planes may be getting ready for take-off. The Environmental Protection Agency this week
informed the United Nations aviation program that it had begun investigating whether airplane
emissions endangered public health. While that alone doesn't amount to crafting rules, the
"endangerment" finding was a necessary precursor for EPA emissions rules on power plants and cars.
The agency said it expects to roll out a notice of proposed rulemaking by April 2015.

An
Out-Of-Control Agency of Zealots, Destroying Your Freedom. [Scroll down] Change one word officially and expand
your overreach by billions. Congress saw what they were trying to do and demanded answers. I don't know how that one
turned out, but it would seem to be this one. A little over a week ago, the House passed legislation that would prevent the
EPA from implementing a proposed rule to define its jurisdiction over bodies of water. EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy has
said the rule does not significantly expand the agency's existing authority. Uh huh. Republicans said the rule
would go too far and subject trivial bodies of water to federal regulation.

EPA
can't find top official's text messages. The EPA is poised to "do an IRS" —
similar to what the tax agency had to do with dismissed top official Lois G. Lerner — and
officially notify the National Archives that it may have lost key electronic records, according to a
think tank that's suing to get text messages under an open-records request. Justice Department
lawyers told a federal court on Tuesday that the alert will be coming soon, in a case that's shaping
up as a significant battle over whether government agencies are required to keep cellphone text
messages as "official" records.

Feds
have 'gone wild' with taxpayer-funded credit cards. A congressional hearing on how
federal agencies have "gone wild" with government credit cards found that personal use of
taxpayer-funded cards is significant despite tighter controls passed in 2012. Auditors revealed
more than half of the $153,000 in credit-card purchases sampled at the Environmental Protection
Agency were prohibited under the guidelines. They included multi-course meals at an employee award
ceremony, gift cards and family gym memberships.

19
Times the Government Withheld Documents It Didn't Want You to See. [#17] Also this year, the Environmental Protection
Agency told Congress it was having trouble finding emails relevant to a probe into the environmental impact of a proposed gold and
copper mine in the Bristol Bay watershed in Alaska. In a separate case, a federal judge found that the EPA willfully failed to
keep emails and other records relevant to a Freedom of Information Act request regarding the delay of unpopular regulations until
after the 2012 election.

EPA
Blames Texas for Illinois Air Pollution. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is
blaming power plants in Texas for Illinois air pollution and is using the accusation to justify
restrictions on Texas power plants. EPA claims its cross-state pollution rule, intended to protect
communities in one state from pollution drifting from other states, justifies placing restrictions
on Texas power plants EPA claims are polluting Granite City, Illinois.

EPA
chief: Public tired of debating climate change. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Administrator Gina McCarthy said Friday that the public does not want more "debate or discussion"
about climate change, but government action. "First, people overwhelmingly consider climate change
to be a problem — and they want action, not more debate or discussion," McCarthy said in
a speech at Georgetown University. [...] "Coal as a fuel source for power plants is really not
competitive in most of the United States," McCarthy said in a Q&A after her speech.

The Editor says...
Note two obvious canards: (1) Coal is a highly competitive fuel for power plants. Just ask the governments
of India and China, where new coal-fired power plants are being built as fast as possible. (2) The
American people don't care about global warming any more (perhaps because there is no warming).

Holder
& EPA Ding Carmaker $350 Million for Climate Change. In sensational language, Attorney
General Eric Holder today announced the biggest enforcement action ever against a greenhouse gas
violator, as the federal government penalized automaker Hyundai Group up to $350 million. [...] What
did they do to deserve the biggest spanking since the Supreme Court, in 2007, gave the EPA power to
regulate greenhouse gases? Hyundai Group overestimated the miles-per-gallon rating in about a
quarter of their Kia and Hyundai models.

McConnell:
Priority is to 'get the EPA reined in'. Incoming Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) says a
top priority of his is "to try to do whatever I can to get the [Environmental Protection Agency] reined in."
In an interview with the Lexington Herald-Leader, McConnell said it wouldn't be easy to block the carbon pollution
regulations for existing power plants, though doing just that is a promise he made to Kentucky on the campaign trail
this year.

Senate
GOP steeling for battle against EPA. Senate Republicans are gearing up for a war
against the Obama administration's environmental rules, identifying them as a top target when they
take control in January. The GOP sees the midterm elections as a mandate to roll back rules from
the Environmental Protection Agency and other agencies, with Republicans citing regulatory costs
they say cripple the economy and skepticism about the cause of climate change.

Proposed
Water Rule Could Put 'Property Rights of Every American Entirely at the Mercy' of EPA.
It seems incredible, but a single missing word could turn a water law into a government land grab so
horrendous even a U.S. Supreme Court justice warned it would "put the property rights of every
American entirely at the mercy of Environmental Protection Agency employees." The missing word is
"navigable." The Obama administration is proposing a rule titled "Definition of 'Waters of the
United States' Under the Clean Water Act," which would strike "navigable" from American water law
and redefine any piece of land that is wet at least part of the year, no matter how remote or
isolated it may be from truly navigable waters, as "waters of the United States," or WOTUS.

Why Does
Washington Want to Hide Science Data from the Public? The EPA claims that the mercury
air and toxics rule would produce $53 billion to $140 billion in annual health and environmental
benefits. But the agency vastly overstates the environmental benefits by including estimated
benefits from reducing particulates already covered by existing regulations. Not including these
particulates lowers the projected benefit to only $6 million, at most. In other words, these
co-benefits account for 99.996 percent of the agency's estimated benefits — much of that
being PM2.5 co-benefits. Here's where the secret science comes in. The two studies that represent
the scientific foundation for 1997 ozone and PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards are highly
questionable and the data concealed, even though the studies were paid for by federal taxpayers and thus
should be public property.

EPA regulations
will add $700 a year to average energy bill. An energy consulting firm predicts
several new EPA regulations will go through bank accounts like a tsunami, and the storm will come
from three directions. Environmental Protection Agency policies that aim to cut carbon dioxide
emissions are expected to create $284 billion in additional energy costs in 2020, according to a
report by Energy Ventures Analysis Inc. The policies, which President Obama supports, will result
in a $680 increase in annual electricity and natural gas bills, says the study, commissioned by
Peabody Energy, the world's largest private-sector coal company.

Report:
EPA Regulations To Raise Power Costs 37 Percent By 2020. A report by Energy Ventures
Analysis found that the EPA underestimates how much its power plant regulatory regime will raise
electricity and natural gas prices by imposing new regulations on power plants, most recently being
the agency's rules to cut carbon dioxide emissions from new and existing power plants. These new
rules to tackle global warming, combined with other rules to reduce more traditional air pollutants,
will dramatically increase Americans' utility bills by 2020, according to EVA's report which was
sponsored by the coal company Peabody Energy. "Annual power and gas costs for residential,
commercial and industrial customers in America would be $284 billion higher ($173 billion
in real terms) in 2020 compared to 2012 — a 60% (37%) increase," the EVA report found.

Mother
of all battles over new smog rule. Lawmakers and lobbyists are digging in for a fight
over what industry groups say is the costliest environmental regulation ever. The Environmental
Protection Agency announced Wednesday that it wants to tighten restrictions on smog-forming ozone,
to limit the legal level to a range of 65-70 parts per billion, down from the current 75.
Opponents say this stringent new restriction will add to the cost of permitting and slash
manufacturing investment. But environmental and public health pressure groups say the
new rule doesn't go far enough.

EPA
unveils contentious plan to tighten ozone standards. The Obama administration unveiled
an ambitious plan Wednesday [11/26/2014 - the day before Thanksgiving] that it said would improve
public health by slashing the ozone pollution that causes smog. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy framed the update to the ground-level ozone standard as an
imperative, bringing agency rules in line with the latest science to protect the nation's most
vulnerable populations from a range of respiratory illnesses including asthma.

Obama's
latest regulatory power grab aims at ozone. President Obama on Wednesday checked off
yet another major item on environmentalists' wish list by targeting smog, further solidifying his
legacy on green issues but also angering big business and giving Republicans fresh ammunition
heading into the final 24 months of this administration. After delaying the action for nearly
four years, the Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday released new tentative rules on ozone,
meant to drastically cut the amount of smog produced by power plants and factories.

The EPA
jumps the shark, banning — ARGON. Its hard to imagine a more inoffensive
substance than Argon. As a noble gas, Argon is chemically inert — it participates in no
chemical reactions whatsoever, except under exotic conditions — there are no known chemical
compounds which can survive at room temperature which include Argon. Argon is not a greenhouse gas.
But Argon is incredibly useful to industry — among other things, is used as a "shield" gas.
Anyone who welds Aluminium or Stainless Steel will be familiar with Argon, which is used with MIG and TIG welders,
to blow oxygen away from the electric welding arc, to prevent oxidative damage to the weld joint.

EPA
Proposes Its Most Expensive Regulation to Date. The strategy of publicly releasing bad
news late on a Friday afternoon in order to avoid significant media scrutiny is well established and
commonly employed by a variety of institutions. For example, corporations may elect to bury a bad
earnings report or government bodies may release unflattering documents just before the weekend when
people are paying the least amount of attention. [...] Although today is not a Friday, it is the day before
what will be a four-day holiday weekend for many Americans. While most people will understandably
be focusing on celebrating Thanksgiving with their families, the White House plans to quietly release
plans for 3,415 new regulations, 189 of which will cost more than $100 million apiece.

EPA:
New Ozone Standards Would Prevent 330 Missed School Days, 750 Premature Deaths. The
Environmental Protection Agency proposed new air quality standards within a range of 65 to 70 parts
per billion, down from the current 75 ppb level, to "better protect the health" of Americans. [...]
McCarthy estimates that meeting a 70 ppb level would prevent 330 missed school days, 32,000 asthma
attacks and 750 premature deaths per year. She said those benefits would increase with a 65 ppb
standard. [...] The National Association of Manufacturers has estimated that a tougher national ambient air
quality standard for ozone could cost the American economy up to $270 billion each year.

The Editor says...
In other words, the EPA is willing to spend almost a billion dollars of your money -- or at least remove a billion
dollars from the U.S. economy -- to prevent one missed school day, or almost a million dollars to prevent one asthma attack.

Be
afraid: This is the real Obama. While Ferguson burned, the president slipped in a
federal rule dubbed "the most expensive regulation ever." On Wednesday [11/26/2014], after delaying
the action for his entire presidency, waiting until there were no more elections, the Environmental
Protection Agency released new tentative rules on ozone, meant to drastically cut the amount of smog
produced by power plants and factories. The move would lead to costly new requirements for air
pollution permits in much of the country. "This would be the most expensive regulation ever
imposed on the American public," said the National Association of Manufacturers, in a July study
calculating that an especially strict version of the rule would wipe out $3.4 trillion in economic
output and 2.9 million jobs by 2040, according to Politico.

EPA's
goofy green-energy rules. The EPA's proposed Clean Power Plan regulations are the most
expansive and economically disruptive rules in four decades from an agency that is notorious for its
reckless disregard for the financial consequences of regulation under the Clean Air Act. The
EPA's rule aims to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions from U.S. power plants by 30 percent. That's an
enormous and costly burden on our power generating utilities. According to Energy Ventures Analysis,
an energy research firm, the annual costs for residential, commercial and industrial energy customers in
America would be about $173 billion higher in 2020 — a 37 percent increase.
Average annual household gas and power bills would increase by $680 or 35 percent.

EPA's
Next Regulatory Tsunami. Looming Environmental Protection Agency ozone regulations
personify the Obama administration's secrecy, collusion, fraud, and disdain for concerns about the
effects that its tsunami of regulations is having on the livelihoods, living standards, health and
welfare of millions of American families. Virtually every EPA announcement of new regulations
asserts that they will improve human health. Draconian carbon dioxide standards, for example, won't
just prevent climate change, even if rapidly developing countries continue emitting vast volumes of
this plant-fertilizing gas. The rules will somehow reduce the spread of ticks and Lyme disease, and
protect "our most vulnerable citizens." It's hogwash.

EPA
staffers linked to 'alleged serious misconduct,' agency reveals. Eight Environmental
Protection Agency employees who racked up a total of more than ten years' worth of paid "administrative
leave" between 2011 and 2014 — valued at more than $1,096,000 — apparently did so
because they were involved in "cases of alleged serious misconduct," Fox News has learned. In a
memorandum sent from EPA's acting assistant administrator, Nanci E. Gelb, to EPA's inspector general,
Arthur Elkins — a draft also was given to Fox News — the agency has revealed that at
least three of the affected employees have now left EPA.

Harvard
Law Professor: EPA Climate Rule Is Unconstitutional. The Environmental Protection
Agency's proposed rule to cut carbon dioxide emissions from power plants is unconstitutional because
it violates the Tenth Amendment and the Fifth Amendment, according to a noted liberal Harvard law
professor. [...] The Clean Power Plan "violates principles of federalism and seeks to commandeer
state governments in violation of the Tenth Amendment," [Laurence] Tribe argues. "It raises serious
questions under the Fifth Amendment as well, because it retroactively abrogates the federal government's
policy of promoting coal as an energy source. Private companies — and whole
communities — reasonably relied on the federal government's commitment to the support of coal."

EPA
uses Jonathan Gruber tactic to impose harmful regulations. "Lack of transparency was really critical to
getting it passed," former Obamacare consultant Jonathan Gruber explained. The Democrats cleverly exploited the
American voters' "lack of economic understanding." Now President Obama's Environmental Protection Agency is using
secretive, duplicitous science, and exploiting people's lack of scientific understanding, to impose punitive regulations
cleverly labeled the "clean power plan." The agency claims the clean power plan will prevent "dangerous manmade
climate change" by reducing carbon dioxide and "encouraging" greater use of renewable energy. Its real goal is
forcing coal-fired power plants to reduce operations significantly or shut down entirely.

McConnell:
Congress' disapproval of EPA 'will soon be very clear'. Incoming Senate Majority Leader Mitch
McConnell said there won't be any mistaking what Congress thinks about the Environmental Protection Agency
when Republicans take control of the upper chamber in January. The Kentucky Republican, responding to
comments Secretary of State John Kerry made at a United Nations climate change conference in Lima, Peru,
said the EPA would be in his crosshairs early next session.

Where
will you be when the lights go out? Make no mistake; President Obama's "Clean Power
Plan" is not an environmental regulation at all. It's a proposal to completely remake an enormous
sector of our economy which underpins almost every industry and affects every consumer. It is beyond
belief EPA undertook this vast feat of social engineering without considering whether the real world
engineering will even work. We now stand on the precipice of throwing away billions of dollars and
decades of time invested in building an electricity infrastructure that undeniably works.

EPA sets
first national standard for coal waste. The Obama administration on Friday [12/19/2014] set the
first national standards for waste generated from coal burned for electricity, treating it more like
household garbage rather than a hazardous material.

EPA
can't regulate lead bullets, says federal court. A federal appeals court denied a
lawsuit Tuesday by environmental groups that the EPA must use the Toxic Substances Control Act
regulate lead used in shells and cartridges. "We agree with EPA that it lacks statutory authority
to regulate the type of spent bullets and shot identified in the environmental groups' petition,"
Judge David Tatel wrote for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Environmental groups had sued the agency to do so, saying spent lead ammunition posed an "unreasonable
risk of injury" to wildlife and humans who would eat the animals they kill. The groups rejected
the EPA's assertion that it lacked the authority to do so.

The
EPA wants you to build green fires in your fireplace this winter. The Environmental
Protection Agency this week provided instructions for how people can build a fire in their home for
the holidays, and more importantly for the EPA, how to build a fire that doesn't release as much
pollution into the air. "Across the country this holiday season, families and friends will gather
around fires in woodstoves or fireplaces," the EPA wrote. "But how you build that fire —
and what you burn — can have a significant impact on air quality and health, both inside your
home and out."

5 Federal
Agencies in the GOP's Crosshairs. [#4] Environmental Protection Agency: Senate Majority
Leader-to-be Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said during his campaign this year that his top priority in 2015 is to "do
whatever I can to get the EPA reined in," a reference to the numerous executive actions President Obama has
announced to address climate change. McConnell comes from Kentucky, a coal producing state and is
intent on protecting Kentucky's economy.

Block EPA energy
mandate. The Obama administration is on a crusade against our state's energy
policies — and Kansas is fighting back. When the administration announced last year that
it would force us to slash our greenhouse-gas emissions, our state quickly sued the federal government.
That was the right thing to do — the mandate is illegal and would harm our economy in numerous
ways. But despite numerous legal challenges, the Obama administration's Environmental Protection Agency
will release the final regulation soon. Once that happens, our state will be legally bound to implement
it. Unless our Legislature acts.

Senate
environment panel to hit EPA regulations early and often. Sen. Jim Inhofe said he
plans to use a legislative maneuver that would allow rejection of environmental regulations by
majority vote to take whacks at President Obama's agenda, signaling a contentious two years between
the White House and Congress with the Oklahoma Republican helming the Environment and Public Works
Committee. Inhofe said he intends to use the Congressional Review Act to strike down a proposed
rule limiting carbon emissions from power plants along with other regulations once they are finalized.
Any attempt to do so, however, almost certainly would be vetoed by Obama, who has said he plans to
protect his environmental and climate policies.

EPA's
Wood-Burning Stove Ban Has Chilling Consequences For Many Rural People. It seems that
even wood isn't green or renewable enough anymore. The EPA has recently banned the production and
sale of 80 percent of America's current wood-burning stoves, the oldest heating method known to
mankind and mainstay of rural homes and many of our nation's poorest residents. The agency's
stringent one-size-fits-all rules apply equally to heavily air-polluted cities and far cleaner plus
typically colder off-grid wilderness areas such as large regions of Alaska and the American West.

EPA
Moves to Count Methane Emissions from Fracking. The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency is proposing a new rule that would require energy companies to report to the federal government
all greenhouse gas emissions from oil well fracking operations and natural gas compressor stations and
pipelines. The EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program currently requires energy companies to report
only those emissions from fracking operations that involve flaring — the industry's practice
of burning off excess natural gas at a well site.

Obama
Is Said to Be Planning New Rules on Oil and Gas Industry's Methane Emissions. The
administration's goal is to cut methane emissions from oil and gas production by up to 45 percent by
2025 from the levels recorded in 2012. The Environmental Protection Agency will issue the proposed
regulations this summer, and final regulations by 2016, according to the person, who spoke on the
condition of anonymity because the administration had asked the person not to speak about the plan.
The White House declined to comment on the effort.

EPA
faces internal review over scrubbed text messages. The Environmental Protection Agency, on the heels
of the controversy at the IRS over missing emails, is facing a probe of its own over whether it improperly scrubbed
text messages. The EPA inspector general's office announced this week it is launching an audit into the agency's
policies for keeping text messages. The audit was prompted by a complaint from Republicans on the House science
committee, worried the EPA may have "deleted thousands of text messages" that should have been preserved.

Exposed
EPA Memo: Tie Fighting Global Warming To Americans' 'Personal Worries'. An
Environmental Protection Agency memo sent to top officials implored the agency to build up support
for its agenda by tying its regulatory agenda to the "personal worries" of Americans. "Polar ice
caps and the polar bears have become the climate change 'mascots,' if you will, and personify the
challenges we have in making this issue real for many Americans," reads a memo sent around to top
agency officials in March 2009, just months after President Barack Obama took office.

The
EPA Uses Children (and Adults) as Guinea Pigs. The United States Environmental
Protection Agency (US EPA) has been involved in a scandalous, unethical, and illegal human exposure
experimental research program for two decades. The Agency has sponsored, encouraged and funded
research that exposes children and adults to air pollution, which it has told the congress and
announced to the public is toxic, lethal, even cancer causing. During the 2000s, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency-funded researchers at Southern California Medical Schools sprayed
high doses of diesel exhaust particles up the noses of 10-15 year old children in a 'scientific'
experiment to see what would happen. Federal and California State laws prohibit such immoral and
unethical experiments with children or even adults. Does the EPA disregard and disrespect law and
ethics in a mindless crusade to regulate air?

EPA
director warns of vanishing snow due to global warming as historic blizzard approaches. In politics,
much as with a Broadway chorus line, timing is everything. That's a lesson that current EPA Director, Gina
McCarthy will probably take to heart after this one. As the northeast braces for what is being described
as a potentially historic snowstorm, Ms. McCarthy spent the beginning of her weekend huddling with environmental
activists with a clear message. These climate change deniers will ruin the ski industry because we're going
to run out of snow. The Environmental Protection Agency, Aspen Skiing Co., and a pair of Olympic snowboarders
teamed up Thursday [1/22/2015] to help spread the word about climate change and the threat it poses to winter
sports, tourism, and recreation in the Aspen area and beyond.

The Editor says...
The burning of fossil fuels produces carbon dioxide. On that we can all agree. Suppose it were true that
carbon dioxide accumulated in the atmosphere permanently and caused global warming at the rate of two or three degrees
per century. (It doesn't.) Even if this were proven to be the case, which would you rather sacrifice:
the oil industry or the recreational skiing industry? The EPA Director seems to be more concerned about skiing.
Maybe that's because the wealthy liberal elite like to ski.

Report:
EPA Fudged The Numbers To Justify Its 'Costliest Regulation Ever'. The Environmental
Protection Agency inflated the monetized benefits of a major air quality rule to justify imposing a
harsher smog standard on U.S. counties, according to a new report by Energy In Depth (EID).
"EPA's ozone rule could very well be the costliest regulation in U.S. history," said Steve Everley,
spokesman for the petroleum industry-backed EID. "If a rule of this magnitude is to be imposed,
then the EPA should consider providing a far more scientifically robust 'public health' basis —
one that doesn't rely on inflated health benefits or a lack of appreciation for the very real economic costs."

EPA
Chief: 'Aspen's Climate Could Be a Lot Like That of Amarillo, TX' in 2100. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) administrator Gina McCarthy took to the EPA and White House blogs Wednesday [1/28/2015] to declare that
"We Must Act Now to Protect Our Winters." McCarthy was in Aspen, CO, last week, the famous ski destination and
home to an X-Games venue, and she warned that without action on climate change, "Aspen's climate could be a lot like
that of Amarillo, TX, by 2100."

The Editor says...
Aspen's elevation is 7890 feet. Amarillo's elevation is 3500 feet. The climates of the two
cities are probably similar right now, except for the altitude. I find it difficult to believe that
a bureaucrat can predict the weather 85 years from now. Most global warming alarmists are worried
about a temperature change of two degrees per century, which would not be enough to kill the skiing industry
in Colorado, nor would two degrees of warming turn Aspen into Amarillo.

U.S.
EPA chief at the Vatican to discuss climate change with the Pope's staff. The head of
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said on Friday she hoped Pope Francis' upcoming message to
his flock on the environment would help galvanize concern about climate change and convince sceptics
that "the science is real". EPA administrator Gina McCarthy, visiting the Vatican to discuss
climate change, said U.S. President Barack Obama shared the pope's belief that it was a moral issue
because its effects would be felt most by the poorest and weakest nations. "The pope knows his
own beliefs and I want him to know that the president is aligned with him on these issues," she told
reporters.

Feds To Regulate
Fake Fireplaces To Stop Global Warming. Better go out and buy a gas fireplace and stove soon
before federal regulations make them more expensive. Federal officials are looking to regulate the
energy usage of fake fireplaces as part of the Obama administration's effort to fight global warming.

Republicans
warn EPA plan would give feds 'free reign' to regulate almost all waterways. Republican lawmakers
warned Wednesday [2/4/2015] that a complex EPA proposal in the works would give the federal government "free reign"
to regulate virtually any waterway or wetland in the country. In a rare joint House-Senate hearing, EPA
Administrator Gina McCarthy was called to explain the plan, which has prompted complaints from farmers and
agriculture groups, as well as local environmental officials who worry the EPA is claiming authority that
should be left to the states.

Thanks,
EPA: Your New 'Navigable Waters' Rule Strengthens The Case Against Administrative Law.
When Congress passed the Clean Water Act in 1972, it was exercising its power to regulate interstate
commerce by prohibiting discharges into the nation's "navigable waters." If a body of water could be
used to transport goods from one state to another, it was covered by the Act. Like so many other statutes
enacted over the last 80 years — that is, since the advent of the administrative state under
FDR — the Clean Water Act (CWA) depends on bureaucratic interpretation and enforcement.

One
way for Congress to halt Obama's executive overreach. President Obama's abuse of his
authority is being carried out by government bureaucrats running wild with power. Executive branch
bureaucrats represent a serious threat to our liberty, and the new Republican Congress must pass
legislation such as the REINS Act to rein in the excessive power wielded by the executive branch.
Climate change regulations being advanced by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) offers a case
study justifying the need for the REINS Act as a way to counter Obama's executive branch of power.

Regulatory
agencies burden economy. An alphabet soup of federal agencies is restricting job
creation and slowing economic recovery for the rest of the United States. [...] And when it comes to
issuing job-crushing regulations, no federal agency is more efficient than the Environmental
Protection Agency. The EPA has proposed regulations on emissions from power plants that the U.S.
Chamber's Energy Institute estimates would cost $480 billion and eliminate 3.6 million jobs by
2030. The rules would also cost American families an average of $200 per year in higher electrical
rates — a loss that will hit the poor and elderly the hardest. Worse yet, the EPA's
recent proposal to slash the ozone standard by up to 20 percent could be the costliest regulation
in U.S. history.

EPA
CO2 Regs 'The Most Fundamental Transformation' Of US Power. The head of a major U.S.
utility said EPA rules to fight global warming will fundamentally transform the way America
generates and delivers electricity to millions of residents. Gerry Anderson, Chairman and CEO of
the utility DTE Energy, told the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission that the EPA's Clean Power
Plan "is the most fundamental transformation of our bulk power system that we've ever undertaken."
FERC held a hearing Thursday on the EPA's plan to cut carbon dioxide emissions from power plants
30 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. The plan is the keystone of the Obama administration's
climate agenda as power plants emit one-third of the country's carbon dioxide emissions.

ATF
and EPA quietly working on gun control with ammunition bans. About a year and a half
ago, we wrote a story about the closing of the Doe Run lead smelting facility, the last primary lead
smelter in the U.S. and whether this was a "backdoor effort" to control guns. After all, no lead
means no ammunition, which means your gun becomes about as lethal as a ball-peen hammer.
Naturally, we were roundly attacked by leftists who said that was ridiculous, because most
ammunition comes from secondary lead, and there's still plenty of that around. Unless
of course lead is banned.

Obama's Little Shop of
Horrors. [Scroll down] What about Obama's EPA? They have been allowed to slowly
take over more and more property around the United States regardless of the consequences to the
American people and their livelihoods. The most recent is 12 million acres in Alaska.
It does not matter that the people of Alaska need the land in order to survive. The Antiquities
Act of 1906 allowed the federal government to take small parcels of land for monuments and national
parks. However, the Obama administration has taken this to a whole new level, and is using the
law to take over million and millions of acres of land across the United States.

Judge
rules EPA lied about transparency, tells agency to halt discrimination against conservatives.
Judge Royce C. Lamberth concluded the agency may have lied to the court and showed "apathy and carelessness"
in carrying out the law, though the judge was unable to determine if documents were intentionally destroyed.
[...] In a scorching 25-page opinion, the judge accused the agency of "insulting" him by first claiming it
had done a full search for records, then years later retracting that claim without any explanation.

Cahoots

Senator:
Emails Reveal EPA, Green Group in 'Beyond Cozy' Relationship. Republican lawmakers say
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency enjoys a "beyond cozy" relationship with a liberal
environmental action group that seeks to reshape national energy policies in a way that would hurt
American businesses and families. Sen. David Vitter, R-La., the top Republican on the Environment
and Public Works Committee, told The Daily Signal that the Natural Resources Defense Council played
an "absolutely inappropriate" role in drafting the EPA's new carbon emissions plan.

Emails
show 'collusion' between EPA, environmental lobby: watchdog. The EPA and environmental
groups are exceptionally close for a government agency and lobby groups, with a revolving door and
pressure from the groups often shaping EPA's policies, according to a new report from a conservative
watchdog group based on emails obtained in a yearslong battle with the agency. The report, which
details what the Energy & Environment Legal Institute terms "collusion" between the Environmental
Protection Agency and eco-friendly groups, is also a study in the way E&E used open records laws to
force transparency on a secretive agency.

GOPs
Charge Environmental Lobby Getting 'Unprecedented Access' to EPA Officials. Republicans in both the House and Senate are
opening inquiries into what they maintain is the improper influence the Natural Resources Defense Council has on the Environmental
Protection Agency policies. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Oversight & Government Reform Committee, and Sen.
David Vitter (R-La.), ranking member on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, maintain the NRDC played a dominant role in
developing proposed regulations that will limit carbon emissions from existing coal-fired power plants. Issa and Vitter are seeking
documents to determine the extent of the NRDC's influence and whether the New York-based environmental group and the agency engaged in
inappropriate collusion.

Republicans
To Investigate Coziness Between The EPA And Enviros. Republicans are launching an
investigation into the cozy relationship between the Environmental Protection Agency and an
environmental lobbying group that has allegedly played a major role in crafting recent global
warming rules and stymieing an Alaska mining project. Louisiana Sen. David Vitter and California
Rep. Darrell Issa sent a letter to the EPA and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) asking
for records regarding the environmental group's role in drafting a rule limiting carbon dioxide
emissions from existing power plants, and blocking a permit for the Pebble Mine in Alaska.

Senate
report details how EPA officials divert millions of tax dollars to activist groups. Are tax dollars being
channeled through the Environmental Protection Agency to Democratic activists working in the nonprofit sector?
A comprehensive new report released Wednesday by the Republican staff of the Senate Environment and Public Works
Committee makes clear that the answer to that question is yes. The report is entitled "The chain of environmental
command." Major mainstream media which generally parrot the perspectives and analyses of the environmental
movement have utterly ignored the report.

Senate
Report Ties Soros Group to 'Billionaire's Club' Dictating EPA Actions. An "elite group of left
wing millionaires and billionaires" fund "the far-left environmental movement, which in turn controls major
policy decisions," according to a U.S. Senate report released on July 30. The report singled out,
among other groups, the secretive Democracy Alliance, a group founded in part by liberal billionaire George
Soros. The report stated that "DA flouts transparency and public participation as the group emphasizes
secrecy in all its operations." It also said that the influence of the DA and groups like it could be
traced through other liberal groups to environmental regulations mandated by the EPA.

Report:
US, Foreign Elites Pay Greens To Push EPA Policies. Environmental organizations are
often portrayed as homegrown groups fighting back against the tide of corporate boogeymen like Big
Business or Big Oil. But this is not the case, according to a new congressional report. A report
by Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee says environmentalists are being
backed by "an elite group of left-wing millionaires and billionaires." This "Billionaire's Club"
funnels money to environmental groups who then lobby on behalf of the Environmental Protection Agency
to help promote its agenda, in return, getting access to generous tax write-offs and federal funding.

Obama's EPA And IRS Violate Our Constitutional
Rights. The Environmental Protection Agency has acknowledged that it released personal information on potentially thousands of farmers and ranchers to
environmental groups, violating their privacy rights and acting in collusion with private groups with private political agendas. In Nixonian fashion, the EPA
has provided these environmental groups with the dossiers of farmers it has gathered to help them create an enemies list of potential polluters. The agency
acknowledged the information included individual names, email addresses, phone numbers and personal addresses.

Senators
demand transparency on EPA interactions with environmentalists. Sens. David Vitter (R-La.) and James Inhofe (R-Okla.) demanded
transparency from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on their relationships with environmental groups, such as the Sierra Club,
so the public can see how these groups are shaping policy. "The American people deserve to understand the process EPA follows
when crafting the environmental policies under which they must live," Inhofe and Vitter wrote Monday in a letter to acting EPA
administrator Bob Perciasepe.

EPA
waives fee requests for friendly groups, denies conservative groups. Conservative groups seeking information from the
Environmental Protection Agency have been routinely hindered by fees normally waived for media and watchdog groups, while fees for
more than 90 percent of requests from green groups were waived, according to requests reviewed by the Competitive Enterprise
Institute.

EPA
to review claims of bias against conservatives amid fight over IRS. The Environmental Protection Agency's inspector general
will review claims the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) refuses to waive public records fees for conservative groups while granting
the waivers for environmental organizations. Acting Administrator Robert Perciasepe asked the agency's inspector general to review
claims after GOP lawmaker accusations of a double standard. The charges came up Thursday during a House Energy and Commerce Committee
hearing, where Republicans compared the EPA's actions to the IRS's targeting of conservative groups.

EPA accused of
singling out conservative groups, amid IRS scandal. It's not just the IRS. A second federal agency is facing a probe
and accusations of political bias over its alleged targeting of conservative groups. The allegations concern the Environmental
Protection Agency, which is being accused of trying to charge conservative groups fees while largely exempting liberal groups.
The fees applied to Freedom of Information Act requests — allegedly, the EPA waived them for liberal groups far more often
than it did for conservative ones.

EPA confesses to handing out farmers' personal information to
activist-lawyers. [T]he EPA just admitted that, yeah, it gave out a bunch of personal information about farmers and
ranchers — including phone numbers, email addresses, regular addresses, and whatnot — to various environmental
groups. The EPA also is kind of admitting that, yeah, maybe it shouldn't have given out that information, which is why they've
asked those groups to give that information back (note that the EPA apparently didn't even bother to ask that the groups give back
the information without making copies first). This is not amusing Senator John Thune, because a) the damage is done;
b) apparently nobody in the EPA talks to Agriculture and Homeland Security, which both decided not to make this particular
information available in a database; and c) there's a question about whether or not all of this violates the Privacy Act of 1974.

Senators
Call Out the EPA For Leaking Private Info of Farmers to Radical Environmental Groups. We've known for months now that the
Environmental Protection Agency has been leaking the private information of small farmers to radical environmental groups, some of which
are full of attorneys constantly snooping around for a lawsuit. According to a letter from a group of Senators to Acting EPA
Administrator Bob Perciasepe, the EPA "released farm information for 80,000 livestock facilities in 30 states as the result of
a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from national environmental organizations.

The Totalitarianism
at the Heart of the Obama Scandals. [Scroll down] And most recently, it has come to light that the Environmental
Protection Agency displayed political bias when charging fees to groups seeking information via Freedom of Information Act requests.
Research by a conservative think tank showed that the EPA waived fees for documents requested by left-leaning groups about 90 percent
of the time, while denying fee waivers to conservative counterparts about 90 percent of the time. So much for the
administration that promised transparency. But such behavior is entirely consistent with the power-hungry nature of Obama
and his cronies.

EPA
'Mistakenly' Gives Names of Farmers to Radical Groups. A bipartisan group of 24 senators has sent a letter to the EPA, demanding
that the agency explain why it leaked the names and personal information of more than 80,000 farmers and ranchers to left-wing organizations.
In April, the EPA admitted the information had leaked in a story broken by FoxNews.com.

Senate
GOP blasts EPA for release of private business info to environmental groups. Senate Republicans on the Environment and Public Works Committee
this week criticized the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for improperly releasing private personal and business information to environmental groups.
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), the lead Republican on the committee, and other committee Republicans charged that the EPA answered a Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA) request last year by including business information that should have remained private.

How the EPA connives with Greens
on policy. A U.S. Chamber of Commerce study has found that the EPA has given green groups a seat at the table when drafting
environmental regulations, but it has excluded the people and industries most likely to be affected. The Sierra Club has participated
in "closed-door deals" with the EPA 34 times since 2009; WildEarth Guardians has had the inside line on environmental policy 20 times,
the EPA has struck nine deals with the Natural Resources Defense Council, six with the Center for Biological Diversity, and five with the
Environmental Defense Fund. How have these overtly political groups obtained such access to policy decisions that have the power to
destroy industries and eliminate jobs?

Rogue EPA Staff Spies On
U.S. Farmers, Releases Data. We saw such leaking of data compiled on one group to its political opponents in the IRS
scandal. In that case, the IRS leaked the 2008 confidential financial documents of the National Organization for Marriage to the
rival Human Rights Campaign. At that time, Joe Solmonese, a left-wing activist and Huffington Post contributor, was the president
of the HRC. Solmonese also was a 2012 Obama campaign co-chairman. Now a letter from a group of 24 senators to Acting EPA
Administrator Bob Perciasepe claims that the EPA has "released farm information for 80,000 livestock facilities in 30 states as
the result of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from national environmental organizations."

Emails Show Extensive
Collaboration Between EPA, Environmentalist Orgs. Internal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) emails show extensive
collaboration between top agency officials and leading environmentalist groups, including overt efforts to coordinate messaging and
pressure the fossil fuel industry. The emails, obtained by the Energy and Environment Legal Institute (EELI) through a Freedom
of Information Act lawsuit, could fuel an ongoing controversy over EPA policies that critics say are biased against traditional sources
of energy. Emails show EPA used official events to help environmentalist groups gather signatures for petitions on agency
rulemaking, incorporated advance copies of letters drafted by those groups into official statements, and worked with environmentalists
to publicly pressure executives of at least one energy company.

Ranchers,
farmers fear eco-terrorists after EPA releases private info. The Environmental Protection Agency has told farmers and
ranchers it is sorry for handing private information about them over to environmental groups, but agriculture advocates who fear
attacks from eco-terrorists say it's like closing the barn door after the horses escaped. In response to Freedom of Information
Requests, the federal agency released information on up to 100,000 agriculture industry workers, including their home address and phone
numbers, GPS coordinates and even personal medical histories.

Democrats
armed with wealth of EPA records; Little trace of FOIA requests from Republicans. Democrats have filed more
than 50 FOIA requests, including lots seeking correspondence between Republicans and EPA officials — letters that
operatives will scour for any hint that politicians' rhetoric doesn't square with how they conduct themselves outside
of public view. Their findings help supply a steady flow of material for damaging news stories and campaign ads.
Twenty-eight of the Democrats' requests have been completed. [...] Republican political committees have filed just four
requests since 2012, and none of those has been fulfilled.

Emails
Reveal EPA Collaboration with Environmental Activists. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency routinely
collaborates with environmental activist groups to develop stringent regulatory policies and strategies, according to emails
obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. The emails confirm longstanding suspicions that EPA pursues hidden
agendas on behalf of environmental activist groups. The Energy and Environment Legal Institute obtained emails
showing the Starbucks located in the J.W. Marriott Hotel near EPA's Washington, DC headquarters serves as a
convenient "off campus" meeting place, where EPA officials and environmental activists plot strategy. By sitting
down with government regulators at the local Starbucks rather than EPA headquarters, environmental activists can avoid
signing in at EPA headquarters and thus keep the meetings secret.

Sue and Settle

EPA Growth Knows No Limits. [Scroll down] Just
as scary, the EPA is replacing American citizens and state regulatory officials' input with environmental activist groups through sue and settle
agreements. Here's how it works: An environmental litigation organization like the Sierra Club sues the EPA for failing to meet a deadline
for regulatory action. Instead of challenging the suit, both the EPA and the environmental groups immediately engage in a friendly settlement
that determines a deadline. By dictating how the EPA should roll out environmental regulations, these settlements effectively render official
policy without any input from elected officials at the federal and state levels.

What is the EPA hiding? The Environmental Protection Agency has been
a lightning rod for controversy during the Obama Administration as they have pushed the applications of the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act to their
limits in seeking to control all land use across the nation. One area that hasn't received as much scrutiny, but reeks of old-style influence
peddler politics is the Agency's escalation of sue and settle cases to change the law through federal court decree operating hand in hand with radical
environmentalist groups that are willing participants in the scam.

Primary
Document Dump Fridays: Anatomy of an Ongoing Sue & Settle Scandal. Sue and settle refers to sweetheart lawsuits between EPA
and environmental groups. The victims are States, which get left out of negotiations with a material impact on policy-making, despite
the fact that they — the States — are EPA's rightful partners (rather than green groups). In fact, the
opportunity for such sue and settle shenanigans is created by the Congress's overreliance on deadlines in environmental statutes.
The Clean Air Act, in particular, contains far many more date-certain duties than the agency has proven capable of performing.
Since 1993, of 200 date-certain duties pursuant to three core Clean Air Act programs, only 2% were completed on time, and the agency
was, on average, late by almost 6 years.

EPA's "sue and settle" scam. Earlier this week, I wrote
about a new lawsuit by Arizona in an attempt to fight "regional haze" regulation by the EPA. Sean Hackbarth follows up at the US Chamber of Commerce with
a look at how the EPA uses the courts to push the boundaries on regulation, in a scam Sean calls "Sue and Settle".

John C. Beale
... living proof that it's nearly impossible to get fired from a government job.

Former senior EPA adviser Beale expected to plead guilty in $900,000 pay fraud. Over the past 12 years,
John C. Beale was often away from his job as a high-level staffer at the Environmental Protection Agency. He cultivated an air of mystery and explained
his lengthy absences by telling his bosses that he was doing top-secret work, including for the CIA. For years, apparently, no one checked.

EPA official who faked CIA ties takes the Fifth.
The former senior EPA adviser who stole $900,000 from taxpayers while posing as a CIA agent pleaded the Fifth on Tuesday morning — shortly before
House members expressed outrage upon learning that he's still due to get his government pension. John C. Beale invoked his right not to incriminate
himself when facing questioning from the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, just four days after he pleaded guilty to charges that could bring
him three years in prison.

The Editor says...
If he has pled guilty, then he has already incriminated himself, so why hide behind the Fifth Amendment?

The 'Spy' Who Fooled the EPA. Information
released by law enforcement, and details from an investigation by Louisiana Senator David Vitter, show that the fraud began when [John C.] Beale
stated in his 1989 EPA job application that he'd worked for the U.S. Senate, though there is no record of such employment. By 1994 Beale was
claiming he was a CIA operative to justify prolonged absences. Apparently this raised no eyebrows at EPA. Prosecutors estimate that from
2000 to 2013 Beale was absent from his EPA duties for a total of 2.5 years, claiming to be working for "Langley" or on a special EPA "research
project."

Who Are The People Touting Global Warming? Here's
One. Michael Isikoff at NBC News comes up with an interesting report today on government waste, fraud and abuse. It seems the EPA
was playing top-dollar to a "climate-change expert" who told them he was working undercover as a CIA spy in Pakistan. Except he wasn't. He was
goldbricking.

John Beale's EPA. Last month we told you about
John Beale, the Environmental Protection Agency employee who bilked taxpayers out of almost $900,000 by pretending to be a secret agent. [...] He was among
the EPA's most senior, most highly paid officials, one entrusted with formulating the agency's most controversial policies. Thus the consequences of
his EPA tenure go far beyond the specific fraud for which he will now go to prison. [...] What Congress needs to examine is whether the policies that the
head of EPA says were shaped to a large degree by Beale were also based on fraud.

The EPA's Million-Dollar Con Man. As a
senior policy adviser in the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Air and Radiation, [John C.] Beale dealt with his workplace malaise by convincing
his bosses that he was a CIA operative whose top-secret work required him to be out of the office for long periods of time — including one stretch
that lasted 18 months. Sometimes Beale claimed to be in Pakistan. Other times he claimed to be at CIA HQ in Langley. In reality, the
agency's top climate-change expert spent most of his time puttering around his Northern Virginia home or at his vacation house on the Cape, collecting his
salary (plus bonuses!) while doing zero work.

Smoking Gun:
Disgraced Obama EPA Official Testifies to Anti-Capitalist Plan. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has released
a transcript of former senior EPA official John Beale's testimony. The Committee deposed Beale in connection with his recent fraud conviction.
He was sentenced to prison for posing as a CIA agent, and defrauding the government of about $900,000. Beale told the Committee that under
President Barack Obama, the Environmental Protection Agency is being used for a purpose far beyond protecting the environment.

John
Beale: The EPA fraudster you've never heard but whose work is destroying America. Who is John Beale and why
is he ruining your life? John Beale was a career employee in the Environmental Protection Agency. He was not
qualified for the job he got. In fact, it is a bit of a mystery how he got the job. Beale defrauded the government,
claiming to be an employee of the Central Intelligence Agency taking lengthy absences from his job in order to go to serve
the CIA. Beale served thirty-two months in prison once he was found out. [...] While an employee of the EPA, Beale
created the EPA playbook, a guide to not only exaggerating the benefits of regulations versus their costs, it also created
the insidious tactic of "sue and settle" or what is often called "friendly lawsuits."

EPA
fraudster helped craft sweeping air quality rules. A former high-ranking EPA staffer convicted of stealing
nearly $900,000 by pretending to be a CIA spy had virtually no experience, got his job with help from a college buddy,
and went on to play a key role in sweeping environmental regulations, according to a report Senate Republicans released
Wednesday [3/19/2014]. Those regulations remain in place despite John C. Beale's lack of environmental
expertise, Republican investigators said, adding that they want the Environmental Protection Agency to review the
work in which Beale was involved during his 24-year tenure.

Phony
CIA Agent Pulled Off a 'Scam' to Impose Environmental Regulations. Remember the EPA
bureaucrat who got caught receiving $900,000 in pay without working because he claimed he also was
employed by the CIA? According to a report from the Senate Environment and Public Works
Committee, the man, former climate policy expert John Beale, "retired" when questions arose about
his spotty attendance and expense records. Only he didn't file his retirement paperwork and
continued to draw an active-duty salary for some time after. His boss at the time in the EPA's
Office of Air and Radiation, now-EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, knew this for about seven months
and did nothing to stop it.

Report:
EPA fraudster wrote the EPA's Playbook' on regulations. A report by Senate Republicans contends that the
Environmental Protection Agency's regulatory "playbook" was written by known agency fraudster John Beale, who put into
place major air quality regulations that set the stage for "the exponential growth of the agency's power over the
American economy." According to Republican senators, Beale used "Machiavellian" tactics to change the role
of the EPA from protecting the environment to pushing an ideological political agenda aimed at expanding agency
control over the economy.

Toothless
EPA homeland security office bristles at oversight. When EPA officials began having doubts in
2012 about John Beale — a top adviser who bizarrely claimed he was missing work because he was
on secret CIA spy missions — they didn't go to the agency's inspector general for an investigation.
Instead, they went to the Environmental Protection Agency's little-known office of homeland security to
check out Beale's story. Beale's ruse eventually unraveled, but questions have emerged in the wake
of his time and attendance fraud case about the role of the EPA's homeland security operation.

The
Jailbird Architect Of Obama's Global Warming Plan. When President Obama announced an
unprecedented effort by the EPA to strong-arm states into adopting cap-and-trade, he made the
announcement not by focusing on the benefits of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but rather on
the so-called co-benefits that closing coal plants will have on particulate matter, which is
already tightly regulated. These purported co-benefits are based on two secret studies that have
never been publicly validated. Amazingly, the architect of this co-benefits strategy is a long-time
EPA staffer named John Beale, now known as federal inmate number 33005-016 and locked up for fraud
at Cumberland Federal Correctional Institution.

EPA employee stole $886K from the agency.
An Environmental Protection Agency employee knowingly stole more than $886,000 from the agency, according to a criminal filing from the Department of
Justice. The alleged fraud occurred in the EPA's Office of Air and Radiation under the nose of former administrator Gina McCarthy, who now
heads up the entire agency. "There appears to be corruption to the umpteenth degree," said Louisiana Republican Sen. David Vitter.

Lisa Jackson a/k/a Richard Windsor
Secrecy and chicanery in "the most open and transparent administration in history."

EPA chief's secret 'alias' email account
revealed. The name Richard Windsor may sound innocuous, but it is allegedly one of the secret "alias" email accounts used by Obama EPA
Administrator Lisa Jackson. "That is the name — sorry, one of the alias names — used by Obama's radical EPA chief to keep her
email from those who ask for it," Chris Horner, senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute and author of the new book "The Liberal
War on on [sic] Transparency," told the Daily Caller News Foundation in an email.

EPA execs use secret email addresses to skirt FOIA, suit alleges.
Environmental Protection Agency senior executives used secret email addresses to skirt freedom of information laws, a lawsuit by a free-market
think tank alleges. The Competitive Enterprise Institute filed a lawsuit against the EPA last week claiming senior executives at the
agency used secret email accounts to conduct public business, shielding their communications from the Freedom of Information Act.
The suit cites an internal EPA memo, first revealed in a 2008 Government Accountability Office, which describes secondary email accounts
known only to a "few EPA staff members, usually only high-level senior staff."

Who is 'Richard Windsor'?
In The Liberal War on on Transparency, published by Threshold Editions last month, I revealed the existence of a series of black, or "alias" email
accounts used by EPA administrators. These were actively instituted by none other than Carol Browner, who designed her own secret address, for an
account that I also learned was set to "auto-delete". You remember Ms. Browner? She's the lady who suddenly ordered her computer hard drive
be reformatted and backup tapes be erased, just hours after a federal court issued a "preserve" order that her lawyers at the Clinton Justice Department
insisted they hadn't yet told her about? She's the one who said it didn't matter because she didn't use her computer for email anyway? Yes,
that one.

Is The Obama EPA Running Its Own Black-Ops
Program? Federal law prohibits the government from using private emails for official communications unless they are appropriately stored and can be
tracked. Because things look suspicious at the EPA, the House Science Committee is investigating the possibility that the agency has conducted business it
doesn't want the public to see. On Friday [11/16/2012], the committee delivered letters to the EPA and "various agency inspectors general" seeking to
find out if "senior personnel have been conducting official business through secretive means such as aliases and private email accounts."

Congress demands EPA's secret email accounts.
A House committee has launched an investigation into whether EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson used an email alias to try to hide correspondence from open-government
requests and her agency's own internal watchdog — something that Republican lawmakers said could run afoul of the law. The science committee has
asked Ms. Jackson to turn over all information related to an email account under the name of "Richard Windsor," which is one of the aliases identified by a researcher
looking into the EPA.

Congressmen Confront
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson Over Use of Alias 'Richard Windsor'. Two members of Congress sent a letter to EPA administrator Lisa Jackson over her use
of the alias "Richard Windsor." The congressmen, Fred Upton and Cliff Stearns, want Jackson to explain her actions. [...] Upton is the chairman of the House
Committee on Energy and Commerce; Stearns is the chairman of the subcommittee on oversight and investigation.

EPA inspector general audits agency's
use of secret email accounts. Last week the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of the Inspector General announced an audit of the agency's
electronic records management practice to determine if it follows the law when conducting official business using private and alias email accounts. [...] Among
other things, the Inspector General's office will look at is whether or not the EPA "[p]romoted or encouraged the use of private or alias email accounts to
conduct official government business."

EPA
IG audits administrator's private e-mail account. Leaders of two House committees with jurisdiction over the EPA have questioned whether the agency
has been fully transparent in its handling of electronic records. Last month, House science committee Chairman Ralph M. Hall (R-Tex.) and five of his
colleagues wrote to EPA Inspector General Arthur A. Elkins Jr. and questioned whether Jackson violated federal law by using "private email and alias accounts to
conduct official government business."

Head of EPA
does a bunch of her work on alias e-mail account. So, the head of one of the most active and heavy-handed regulatory agencies
in the federal government does a bunch of her business with colleagues on an e-mail address, that while it's a .gov address, has no obvious
connection to the EPA administrator herself. Among the regulations the EPA released just last year were five classified as "major" and
expected to cost $4 billion annually. [...] But I'm sure there's nothing the public would want to know about going on in "Richard
Windsor's" e-mail.

Questions mount over EPA administrator's secret email address. The House Committee on
Science, Space, and Technology sent a letter Tuesday [12/18/2012] requesting additional information on the secret email addresses, and earlier this month the EPA's
inspector general announced the agency would begin an investigation into the issue. Chairman Ralph Hall (R., Tex.) and other Republicans on the committee
requested additional information on the secret email account, expressing concern that "the potential for confusion, not to mention intentional malfeasance, is
enormous."

EPA admits secret email use as House leaders fume.
Six House leaders are pressing their demands for documents after a senior Environmental Protection Agency executive confirmed that Administrator Lisa Jackson has
used a fake name and a secret email account while doing official business. [...] It is against federal record-keeping laws and regulations to use a private or secret
email account or fake name to conduct official business.

The Editor says...
A violation of federal law? Well, then I guess we can expect Ms. Jackson to be fired and arrested next week, right?

Exit of EPA boss was a protest.
EPA chief Lisa Jackson suddenly resigned last week because she was convinced that President Obama is planning to green-light the controversial
Keystone XL oil pipeline, The [New York] Post has learned.

Politico's
Framing of Jackson's Resignation from EPA. Please. It's not as if only Republicans oppose the EPA's energy-hostile agenda; last
time I checked, most of West Virginia's national politicians, as well as many if not most of the state's coal miners who are losing their jobs as a
result of out-of-control environmentalism, are Democrats. And I don't recall President Obama or the White House ever having any problems with
what Jackson was saying or doing. The Politico pair also waited until the sixth paragraph of their report to mention Jackson's admitted use of
an accountability-avoiding email account in the name of "Richard Windsor" to conduct official business.

E-mail Scandal at the EPA.
The sudden announcement that Lisa Jackson, the controversial head of the Environmental Protection Agency, will be resigning later this
month means that the mysterious Richard Windsor will be leaving the building with her. His is apparently one of several fake names
on official EPA e-mail accounts that Jackson used to conduct business while at EPA.

Hide & sneak.
Richard Windsor was the nom de plume of EPA chief Lisa Jackson, who announced her resignation last month. Why, you may ask,
would a federal bureaucrat need an alias? [...] Jackson has not been charged with any wrongdoing, but she has apparently been using
unofficial e-mail accounts to discuss government affairs. As a side benefit, such exchanges might have been expected to escape
discovery via the Freedom of Information Act. It is against federal law to use private e-mail addresses to discuss the people's
business.

The EPA is Hiding Something.
From ignoring open-record requests, to creating bogus e-mail accounts and names, the EPA has proven there is no level to which they will
not stoop in an attempt to sidestep the era of open government the President has so vociferously hailed. The tale of Richard Windsor
would hardly warrant a blip on the radar of those analyzing the EPA's activities, save for the fact that Mr. Windsor does not exist.
Windsor is in fact EPA administrator Lisa Jackson, the name used as an e-mail alias she has reportedly used to cover her tracks in private
correspondence.

Goodbye, Lisa Jackson.
During her four years as administrator, Jackson has put her radical environmental agenda before the wellbeing of the U.S. economy, the
integrity of science, and even the structure of the American political system itself. Start with her regulatory record. Since
January 2009, Jackson's EPA has issued 20 "major" regulations — defined as rules with an economic cost of $100 million
or more each year. Incidentally, that $100-million standard looks like a low-ball upon examining many of the Jackson EPA's own
economic-impact statements. These 20 rules carry a total initial cost of $7 billion, a painful capital expenditure
demanded of businesses that aspire to meet compliance standards.

DOJ to Release Secret EPA E-Mails.
Today, the Department of Justice is to produce the first of four monthly batches totaling 12,000 emails to and from the "secondary" email
account of President Obama's EPA administrator, Lisa Jackson. Rolling Stone hailed Jackson as "the most progressive" EPA chief ever.
Today we begin to know her better as "Richard Windsor", which is the false identity Jackson assumed for federal recordkeeping purposes.
Here is why that matters.

New mysteries in EPA's Windsorgate scandal.
Washington's transparency and environmental communites were abuzz yesterday awaiting release by the Environmental Protection Agency of the first
3,000 of an expected 12,000 "Richard Windsor" emails sent to and from outgoing Administrator Lisa Jackson. After sorting through technical
glitches that undermined the agency's first attempt to post the documents ordered released by a federal court, it became obvious that EPA had
only made public about 2,100 emails and "Richard Windsor" — Jackson's admitted illegal non [sic] de plume on one of her government
email accounts — was nowhere to be found.

EPA Email
Release "Gravely Compounded Unlawful Activity We Have Exposed". At about 4:55 p.m. on Monday, the Environmental Protection
Agency finally complied with a court order to deliver the first of four sets of emails in response to a lawsuit filed by Christopher Horner, a
senior fellow in the Center for Energy and the Environment at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Here is Horner's statement on the
emails: Where in the World is Richard Windsor?

EPA
releases first tranche of Lisa Jackson's alias e-mail correspondence. Last we heard of Lisa P. Jackson, she was exiting
the administration for new challenges and time with family or something. Her resignation came just weeks before a court-imposed
deadline for the EPA to release some 12,000 e-mails associated with her alias e-mail account under the name "Richard Windsor."
Competitive Enterprise Institute's Chris Horner stumbled on the Windsor account while perusing documents he'd FOIAed while doing
research for his book, "The Liberal War on Transparency."

The myserious case of Richard
Windsor. All is not as it appears in the case of Richard Windsor, the alias used by outgoing EPA Administrator Lisa
Jackson, apparently to shield email messages from discovery and disclosure. Under court order to cough up the email messages to
Chris Horner of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and having turned over a first installment of 2,100 such email messages earlier
this week, the Obama administration is making this a case that might challenge the ingenuity of Sherlock Holmes.

Lisa Jackson's Gadfly.
Chris Horner is the gadfly determined to force the Obama administration to live up to its professed commitment to transparency. [...]
Horner suspects that, despite what the EPA says, Jackson actually has more than one internal account: at least one used to
correspond with agency employees at large — the one from which the EPA turned over the documents on Monday — and
the Windsor account, used for more sensitive subjects. Horner believes that, in protecting the Windsor e-mails, the administration
is trying to hide its musings on cap-and-trade, a legislative proposal that never gained broad political support.

The Windsor-Not. Republican lawmakers on the House Science, Space,
and Technology Committee warned the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Thursday they may take "formal action" to pry information from
the department regarding outgoing EPA administrator Lisa Jackson's use of secret email addresses. Committee Republicans in a
letter said the agency failed to properly respond to requests for records about the use of non-public email accounts by EPA officials,
including Jackson.

EPA Email Scandal Is Worse
than Originally Thought. President Barack Obama and, for that matter, most of America seem woefully ignorant about a scandal
unfolding at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. As hard as it is to believe, outgoing Administrator Lisa Jackson actually appears to
have had agency personnel create a fictitious employee by the name of "Richard Windsor" so that Jackson could appropriate the Windsor's email
address for her own purposes. We're not talking about some alias to be used for personal correspondence but a totally false identity in
whose name official business was allegedly conducted created specifically to avoid federal record-keeping and disclosure requirements.

E-mail Scandal at the EPA.
When the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a free-market group, came up empty on its FOIA requests for Jackson's e-mails relating to
her anti-coal efforts, it was told by an EPA whistleblower that she was using "Richard Windsor" and other aliases to coordinate with
outside anti-coal groups and engage in other activity she wouldn't want to come to light. After CEI filed suit, the Justice
Department last month reluctantly agreed to produce 12,000 "Richard Windsor" e-mails.

20 Windsorgate
questions for Obama administration. "Richard Windsor" was the government email non [sic] de plume used
by former Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson during her tenure from 2009 through 2013. It is a violation
of multiple federal public access and transparency laws for government officials to use fake email names while doing official business.
[Christopher C.] Horner sued EPA in federal court after the agency refused to provide Jackson emails he requested through the
Freedom of Information Act. A federal court sided with Horner and ordered the emails to be made public.

The EPA's Lisa Jackson: The Worst Head of the Worst Regulatory Agency, Ever.
President Obama and his minions seem to think that freedom is a four-letter word. His administration has imposed an array
of intrusive, nanny-state, financial, environmental and consumer-product regulations that will cost Americans hundreds of billions
of dollars. Public policy has consequences, and excessive, unwise regulation has contributed to a potentially catastrophic
slowing of the nation's economic growth.

EPA Corruption and Scandal.
The EPA and Ms. Lisa Jackson, its chief, have committed extensive violations of law that should receive in-depth scrutiny from
Congress, law enforcement and the American people. Yes the Obama administration has yet another serious scandal on their
hands. The scandal features a fantasy administrator, 'Richard Windsor', and 'his' email account. The account was
established and used by Ms. Jackson to camouflage controversial EPA processes, discussions, decisions and accountability.

The
adventures of 'Richard Windsor' — EPA e-mail dump due today. Sometime Friday [2/15/2013], the Environmental
Protection Agency is expected to deliver a tranche of "Richard Windsor" emails to the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Those
emails may shed light on the efforts of Lisa Jackson, EPA's departing administrator, to conceal details of her involvement in
President Obama's war on coal by using the fictional Windsor as a false online identity for certain federal record-keeping.

Whole Lotta Redactin' Going On. The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) released its second batch of emails from former administrator Lisa Jackson's secret email address Friday [2/15/2013],
but the researcher who sued the agency to obtain the records says it improperly redacted nearly all of the information. The emails,
released in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), are from Jackson's
pseudonymous, secondary email account under the name "Richard Windsor."

Republicans threaten 'formal action' over
EPA head's 'Richard Windsor' emails. House Republicans are threatening "formal action" against the Environmental Protection Agency unless the agency
hands over records about Administrator Lisa Jackson's use of a secondary government email account. Republicans allege that Jackson's use of an internal
account under the alias "Richard Windsor" undercuts the agency's transparency.

Windsor Knot Tightens. Yet another top Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) official used a personal email address to conduct government business, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
disclosures reveal. EPA Region 9 administrator Jared Blumenfeld used his personal Comcast email account to send a news
article to former EPA administrator Lisa Jackson's secret "Richard Windsor" email account. The email was discovered within a
tranche of thousands of emails from Jackson's alias email account disclosed by the EPA earlier this month in response to a FOIA
request by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI).

EPA Official Resigns. A top Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) official
under congressional investigation for using a private email address to conduct government business is stepping down. EPA Region 8
administrator James Martin is resigning this week, according to a press release from Sen. David Vitter (R., La.). Martin faces a congressional
probe for allegedly using a private email account to circumvent disclosure requirements. Bob Perciasepe, the current acting EPA administrator,
also used a private account to send emails to other EPA officials, Vitter said his office has discovered.

Senator: EPA lied about
using private emails. Environmental Protection Agency officials lied when they said a top official used his private
email only once for public business, a Republican senator said Friday [3/8/2013] as he released copies of several emails in which
that official conducted business with the EPA's director and with outside groups.

EPA Corruption and Scandal.
The EPA and Ms. Lisa Jackson, its chief, have committed extensive violations of law that should receive in-depth scrutiny from
Congress, law enforcement and the American people. Yes the Obama administration has yet another serious scandal on their
hands. The scandal features a fantasy administrator, 'Richard Windsor', and 'his' email account. The account was
established and used by Ms. Jackson to camouflage controversial EPA processes, discussions, decisions and accountability.

EPA accused of using
instant messages to avoid sunshine laws in lawsuit. Top Environmental Protection Agency officials used computer instant
messages to try to circumvent open-records laws, according to a new lawsuit filed late last week by a researcher who has been demanding
the agency comply with the law. Christopher C. Horner, the researcher who earlier uncovered that EPA officials were using
private email addresses to conduct official business, said that in going over some of those earlier records he discovered the agency was
using instant messages, too. He now is suing to get a look at those records, which he said EPA has refused to release.

New mysteries in EPA's Windsorgate scandal.
Washington's transparency and environmental communites were abuzz yesterday [1/14/2013] awaiting release by the Environmental Protection Agency of the
first 3,000 of an expected 12,000 "Richard Windsor" emails sent to and from outgoing Administrator Lisa Jackson. After sorting through technical
glitches that undermined the agency's first attempt to post the documents ordered released by a federal court, it became obvious that EPA had only made
public about 2,100 emails and "Richard Windsor" — Jackson's admitted illegal non de plume on one of her government email
accounts — was nowhere to be found.

Former EPA head defends alias email at
alma mater. Lisa Jackson, the former administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, told an audience at Princeton University that
politics are to blame for the uproar over her "Richard Windsor" alias email account, but she wishes she had chosen a less obscure name for the account.

The Editor says...
"Politics are to blame" for Lisa Jackson having that job in the first place.

New
emails: EPA chief pretended to be 'Richard Windsor'. Investigators have questioned whether that email address was used to
hide records from public view. But in the latest twist, Ms. Jackson apparently also used the address to pretend to be someone
else. Michael Martin, CEO of sustainability company MusicMatters, emailed asking if "Richard Windsor" could get a message to Ms.
Jackson, since she didn't seem to be responding to her personal email.

Disgraced
EPA Chief Used Fake Name to Coordinate with Liberal Groups. The Lisa Jackson/Richard Windsor story is getting progressively
weirder as new emails released show that Jackson used her fake "Richard Windsor" account to communicate with top liberal groups without
them being aware of who she really was. It's hard to see why Jackson would want to do that unless she was engaged in activities so
illegal that she didn't trust them or any real life assistant to handle. The current email releases don't show anything that bad,
but we haven't seen all of it. And the only two possible conclusions is that either Lisa Jackson really had something to hide or
she was insane.

Former
EPA chief under fire for new batch of 'Richard Windsor' emails. Critics are leaping on private emails from the former head of the
Environmental Protection Agency that seem to show her using the alias of "Richard Windsor" to communicate with people outside the government.
Messages released Wednesday [5/1/2013] show former EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson using the Windsor email account to talk with people who would later
serve in the Obama administration.

Richard Windsor Lives.
Richard Windsor, the e-mail alias employed by former EPA administrator Lisa Jackson to communicate with high-level Obama administration
officials, environmental activists, and other top EPA officials, is still listed in the agency's digital directory as an EPA employee,
according to an agency employee who asked to remain anonymous. The source tells National Review Online that a search of the
agency's internal directory for Richard Windsor returns an employee by that name, "buried in there with active employees."

White House knew about Lisa Jackson's secret
email account. Email records show that the White House knew about the secret email account used by former Environmental Protection Agency
administrator Lisa Jackson since at least February 2010. In a 2010 email exchange between Jackson and Gary Guzy, the Deputy Director and General
Counsel at the White House Council on Environmental Quality, after some initial confusion, Jackson reveals to the White House staffer that "Richard Windsor" is
her "private" email account.

Lisa Jackson Contacted Lobbyist from Private Email. Former
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lisa Jackson used her private email to conduct official business, including with a lobbyist, in a possible
violation of federal record laws. The emails were part of the latest batch of documents released through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed
by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI). The conservative nonprofit has been digging through Jackson's correspondence for months after it discovered
she used a secret EPA email address under the pseudonym "Richard Windsor."

Coal Industry Regulations Were A
Laughing Matter to the EPA. Lisa Jackson recently left her job as EPA administrator amid an investigation into her use
of alias email accounts. She apparently used those secret accounts to shield official agency business from Freedom of Information
Act requests.

Former EPA Admin Lisa Jackson Hires Lawyer for Email
Investigation. Former Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson has hired a lawyer in the ongoing congressional investigation
into her use of private and secret email addresses to conduct official business. Jackson, who announced her resignation from the EPA in December amid a
congressional probe, hired lawyer Barry Coburn from the D.C. firm Coburn & Greenbaum, according to a source. Jackson now works for Apple as the tech
giant's top environmental officer.

Do you smell whitewash?EPA officials cleared of email abuse charges.
The EPA has failed to train its employees or give them sufficient guidance about abiding by open-records laws, according to an inspector general's report released
Monday [10/7/2013] that chides the agency but clears top-level employees of intentionally trying to hide information by using private email accounts.
Investigators said they talked with top-level employees and found no intent to deceive the public.

Democrats renew push for
Obama EPA pick Gina McCarthy. [Senator David] Vitter, along with other Republicans, say they have unanswered questions about EPA transparency
and the use of secondary email accounts under pseudonyms. Former Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, for example, has come under fire for her email
account under the name "Richard Windsor." Other Republicans criticize Mrs. McCarthy — and the EPA as a whole — for what
they call an anti-fossil-fuels agenda and the use of questionable science to demonize coal, oil and natural gas.

Lisa Jackson Denies Skirting FOIA Laws. Former Environmental Protection
Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson denied circumventing federal record law by using secret email addresses in testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform Tuesday [9/10/2013]. Jackson, who announced her resignation in December and is now the chief environmental officer at Apple, has been in the
crosshairs of congressional GOP investigators since it was discovered last year that she used a secondary EPA email address under the alias "Richard Windsor."

Former EPA Administrator Defiant over Use of Email Aliases.
Seven months after resigning as head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Lisa Jackson returned to the hot seat Tuesday [9/10/2013] to refute allegations she had
abused her official email accounts and used her own private account to circumvent open records requirements. Jackson, who used an email under the alias "Richard
Windsor" at the EPA, said the practice of using a secondary official account was common among former administrators from both parties.

The Editor says...
Really? Name the Republican officials who have used opposite-sex pseudonyms to send clandestine email about official business.

EPA's use of secret email addresses was
widespread: report. EPA employees' use of their own private email accounts to conduct government business was rampant among top-level officials,
according to according to a new report Thursday from Senate Republicans that accused the agency's own internal watchdog of botching an investigation.
Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee said their findings call into question the work of the EPA's inspector general, who in
September issued a report clearing the EPA of wrongdoing in the email scandal.

Vitter Accuses
Inspector General of Providing Cover for EPA in Investigation. Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works
Committee are condemning an inspector general's report exonerating Environmental Protection Agency officials in the case of using
unofficial email addresses to hide their dealings from public scrutiny. In a letter to Arthur A. Elkins Jr., the
agency's inspector general, Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), the panel's ranking member, charged that the probe was not only insufficient
but that it was conducted in a manner "that inappropriately provided cover for EPA's problematic email practice." Vitter
expressed concern over the scope of the OIG investigation, cited flaws in the office's methodology and maintained investigators
arrived at questionable conclusions despite evidence to the contrary.

"Environmental Justice"
EPA code words for a system of handouts to minorities.

EPA
Chief: CO2 Regulations Are About 'Justice' For 'Communities Of Color'. The
Environmental Protection Agency's proposed global warming regulations aren't just about stemming
global temperature rises — according to agency's chief, they are also about "justice" for
"communities of color." "Carbon pollution standards are an issue of justice," said EPA
Administrator Gina McCarthy in a teleconference call with environmental activists. "If we want to
protect communities of color, we need to protect them from climate change." McCarthy is referring
to the EPA's proposed rule that would limit carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants.

The Editor says...
Obviously this is a tactic designed to preemptively paint opposition to the EPA's plans as racist. When the lights go out
on the hottest (or coldest) day of the year because the EPA forced the closure of too many power plants, neither the residents of
low-income neighborhoods nor anyone else will care about the carbon dioxide content of the air.

Whites need not apply.EPA Offers New Round of 'Environmental Justice'
Grants. Ladies and gentlemen, step right up to the public trough: The Environmental Protection Agency is seeking applicants who want a piece
of the $1.5 million set aside for "environmental justice" grants to be awarded in 2013. The taxpayer money goes to non-profit and tribal groups that
address health and environmental issues in minority, low-income, and indigenous communities. These places are "overburdened by harmful pollution," as
the EPA phrases it.

The
EPA's Arrogance and Incompetence Keeps America Dependent on Foreign Oil. Instead of moving forward with a "Hydraulic Fracturing
Study" as requested by Congress, the EPA has done what is characteristic of this administration; they've blown it out of proportion —
making it something bigger, requiring additional personnel, and creating more management, at greater expense. [...] Congress requested a report
based on "best available science," not opinion, yet the EPA has included items such as "environmental justice" — which has nothing
to do with science, and "discharges to publicly owned water treatment plants" — which are no longer a part of the hydraulic
fracturing process.

Obama's
EPA devotes another $7 million to 'environmental justice' campaign. Judicial Watch reports that
[the EPA] announced late last week that the $7 million will be awarded "to study how pollution, combined
with stress and other social factors, affects people in 'poor and under-served communities.' The agency
refers to it as cumulative human health risk assessment research and the goal is to rid under-served communities
of extensive pollution-based problems." Environmental Justice is a left-wing activist concept in which
poor communities are assumed to be more heavily affected by pollution because they are politically defenseless
against polluters, and therefore it is up to the government to step in and provide assistance to redress the
alleged imbalance.

Another $7 Mil
For Environmental Justice. Here's how it works; the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) gives
money to leftwing groups — including some dedicated to helping illegal immigrants — that
teach black, Latino and indigenous folks how to recycle, reduce carbon emissions through "weatherization" and
participate in "green jobs" training. To carry out that phase of the environmental justice crusade, some
80 community organizations have received about $2 million.

Having run out of environmental problems, the EPA turns to socialist activism:EPA spending
millions for 'environmental justice'. Earlier this month the Environmental Protection Agency
awarded a $25,000 grant to the Louisiana Bucket Brigade for air-quality sampling, as part of an initiative
which is funneling millions annually into local organizations for environmental justice. According to
the EPA, environmental justice is "the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of
race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of
environmental laws, regulations, and policies." EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson has made
environmental justice a priority at the agency...

EPA
Spending Another Million Dollars of Taxpayer Money on 'Environmental Justice' Grants. Forty-six
non-profit and tribal organizations are getting a chunk of taxpayer money to spend on "environmental justice
issues," the Environmental Protection Agency announced on Thursday. At the same time it announced the
grants — more than a million dollars in total — the EPA said it is now seeking applicants for
another million dollars to be awarded in 2012.

EPA's Environmental Justice
Tour. The Environmental Protection Agency has had a busy year. The agency's regulatory
shop seems to crack down on a new greenhouse gas every week in the name of fighting climate change. But
despite its full plate, the EPA has still found time to link up with the Congressional Black Caucus for something
called an "Environmental Justice Tour." The tour has whisked EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and
several black legislators around the country to impoverished and predominantly minority communities.

EPA Looking to Hire
'Environmental Justice' Coordinator. The Environmental Protection Agency is looking to hire an
environmental protection specialist who will help the agency accomplish its "environmental justice goals."
The job, in New York City, pays up to $84,146 a year, and according to the job listing on the government Web
site, "You do not need a degree to qualify for this position."

Is
Green Socialism EPA's Real Goal? The EPA is looking for someone with "knowledge of the theories and
principles of environmental protection, especially as they relate to issues of environmental justice and the impacts
of environmental laws, policies, legislation and regulation on minority and/or low-income groups and communities."
The job, located in New York City, pays up to $84,000. No college degree is required — just a
hatred of industry, development and fossil fuels, and a belief that minorities are the deliberate victims of
capitalist exploitation.

EPA vs the Pebble Mine

It is as if the EPA is being used to methodically choke the life out of the U.S. economy. And
perhaps it is.

Judge
puts brakes on EPA's action against Alaska's Pebble Mine. A federal judge has issued a
preliminary injunction blocking the Environmental Protection Agency from taking action against a
massive Alaska mining project that the agency says could be catastrophic for the best run of wild
salmon remaining on the planet. Fishermen in Washington state and Alaska, along with tribal
groups, environmentalists, chefs and even jewelers have fought the proposed Pebble Mine for years
and thought it dead. But the ruling gives at least some temporary hope to the Canadian developers
of the project.

Republicans
To Investigate Coziness Between The EPA And Enviros. Republicans are launching an
investigation into the cozy relationship between the Environmental Protection Agency and an
environmental lobbying group that has allegedly played a major role in crafting recent global
warming rules and stymieing an Alaska mining project. Louisiana Sen. David Vitter and California
Rep. Darrell Issa sent a letter to the EPA and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) asking
for records regarding the environmental group's role in drafting a rule limiting carbon dioxide
emissions from existing power plants, and blocking a permit for the Pebble Mine in Alaska.

Fight
heats up over EPA sabotage of Alaska gold mine. The controversy centers on Pebble Mine, located
200 miles southeast of Anchorage. It is the largest deposit of copper and gold in North America.
[...] The company behind the mine claims the agency went too far. "The intent of the EPA is to take on
an authority that nowhere has Congress given them, to go across America and determine where development should occur
and where it shouldn't occur before anyone ever files a permit," Pebble Limited Partnership CEO Tom Collier said.

EPA
to block Alaska's proposed Pebble Mine over salmon risk. The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency said Friday [7/18/2014] it is endorsing analysis that would essentially block development of a
massive gold-and-copper prospect near the headwaters of a world premier salmon fishery in Alaska.
The controversial mine, whose supporters say the EPA has colluded with environmentalists to block,
"would cause irreversible damage to one of the world's last intact salmon ecosystems," according to
EPA regional administrator Dennis McLerran. The EPA produced analysis showing environmental
damage it believes the mine would cause, which if accepted would bar the project.

Alaska
Responds to EPA power grab. The State of Alaska has responded to the EPA's threatened
preemptive veto of large mining operations in the Bristol Bay region of Alaska via a letter to EPA
Regional Administrator Dennis McLerran dated April 29, 2014. The letter was once again
signed by Alaska's Attorney General, Michael Geraghty. The letter makes very interesting
reading. In parallel, the Pebble Partnership submitted similar comments.

EPA Studies and
Preordained Conclusions. With great fanfare the Environmental Protection Agency announced [in] January
that their "assessment" of potential mining impacts on salmon ecosystems of Bristol Bay, Alaska had discovered
unacceptable risks to salmon and their habitat (various drainages in the region). The agency stated that
they would be proceeding to take action under the Clean Water Act to pre-emptively halt action on the Pebble
Mine project before permitting begins on the proposed copper, gold, and molybdenum extraction project.
Essentially, they studied three mine scenarios, none of which would be able to be permitted under either the
state of federal systems and found them unacceptable.

Inspector General launches
investigation into EPA's Alaska Pebble Mine study. Days after the publication of
Environmental Protection Agency emails showed EPA officials advocating for a pre-emptive veto of the
Pebble Mine project in southwest Alaska, EPA's Office of Inspector General announced plans to look
into the agency's activities to find out whether it broke any laws or policies.

Memos
show EPA officials tried to kill mine project before scientific review. Though President Obama has repeatedly
urged that science guide environmental decisions, regulators inside the Environmental Protection Agency secretly worked
with tribal and environmental activists to preempt a full review of an Alaskan mine and veto the project before the owners'
permits could be considered, internal memos show. Charged with being neutral arbiters, EPA officials instead began
advocating for a preemptive veto of the Pebble Mine project in western Alaska as early as 2008, long before any scientific
studies were conducted or the permit applications for the project were even filed, the emails obtained by The Washington
Times show.

EPA moves
against major Alaska gold mine, could sideline project over salmon. The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday [2/28/2014] moved
against a massive mine project in Alaska which supporters say could contain billions of dollars in gold and copper, delivering a win for
environmentalists who claimed the mine could endanger sockeye salmon populations. The decision on Pebble Mine was highly anticipated,
and comes after an EPA report in January found large-scale mining in the Bristol Bay watershed posed significant risk to salmon and could
adversely affect Alaska Natives in the region, whose culture is built around salmon.

Crushing Pebbles.
The investors haven't even made a formal proposal. But the Environmental Protection Agency had threatened to issue a pre-emptive
veto even before the traditional approving authorities in the state of Alaska and the Army Corps of Engineers had weighed in.
The EPA typically regulates projects once they are approved, but in the Obama Administration such notions of regulatory restraint are
considered quaint.

Vitter slams EPA
after mining giant abandons Alaskan project. Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), the top Republican on the Senate's environment committee,
blamed the Environmental Protection Agency Monday [9/23/2013] after a major mining company abandoned the business partnership seeking build a
huge copper and gold mine in Alaska. "This is a prime example of why the economy isn't recovering. EPA and their far-left environmental
allies are using unprecedented tactics to shut down potential projects and corresponding jobs before they've even begun the permitting process,"
Vitter said after mining giant Anglo American abandoned the proposed Pebble Mine.

EPA Issues New Pebble Mine Assessment.
The proposed mine has the potential to triple the nation's strategic copper reserves and more than double its strategic gold reserves. It could also nearly
double U.S. molybdenum reserves, allowing the United States to rival China in the production of this critical metal used to harden steel for manufacturing and
construction.

EPA study cites report from admitted
data fakers. The Environmental Protection Agency's revised draft assessment of an Alaska mine project cites research from
environmental consultants who admitted falsifying a report in an environmental lawsuit. The EPA's new review of the potential
Pebble Mine in Bristol Bay, Alaska, relied on research from Stratus Consulting and Ann Maest, the company's managing scientist.
Stratus recently admitted to providing false statements in a decades-long $19 billion lawsuit against the oil company Chevron.

New EPA chief must end
political attacks on Pebble Mine. Not long before U.S. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson resigned from President Obama's
cabinet, it was revealed she spent years using a secret e-mail account to conduct official business. Under pressure, the agency
has started releasing those e-mails, which provide a glimpse into how top officials at the agency worked to outmaneuver lawmakers and
the press. But I found one of Jackson's e-mails particularly astounding and hypocritical, given the agency's apparent obsession
with politics and PR spin.

The EPA's Pebble Beaching. Lisa Jackson's
Environmental Protection Agency keeps losing in court, but that doesn't mean she's at all deterred from expanding her authority. Witness her
agency's assault on an Alaska mining project before the developers have even submitted their plans for government approval.

EPA Overreach Threatens Entire U.S.
Economy. Today [5/18/2012], the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a watershed document that provides a
dangerous and misleading analysis of the Pebble Mine in Alaska. Not only does the report fail to recognize that Pebble will
be state-of-the-art and one of the most modern, environmentally-friendly mines in the world, but the report also disregards the
thousands of desperately needed Alaskan jobs that the mine would provide. Serious implications await if the EPA preemptively
denies Pebble's permits, as this move would effectively give the EPA massive (and unconstitutional) powers.

EPA
could thwart mineral mother lode and sets dangerous precedent. The Environmental Protection Agency is employing
a disturbing strategy to evaluate a major new mine project by passing judgment on whether it will damage the environment before
the company even determines how the venture will work. The Pebble Limited Partnership wants to mine a deposit in southwest
Alaska that holds one of the largest concentrations of copper, gold and molybdenum in the world — at least 80 billion
pounds of copper, 100 million ounces of gold, and five billion pounds of molybdenum. The mother lode of minerals is
estimated to be worth $200 billion to $500 billion.

$500B Alaskan gold mine in
upstream battle with EPA, salmon advocates. An Alaskan mine that may contain more than $500 billion in gold, copper and other
minerals will never get dug if environmentalists get their way. The proposed Pebble Mine, near the headwaters of Bristol Bay in southwest
Alaska, could yield a staggering 107 million ounces of gold, 80 billion pounds of copper and 5.6 billion pounds of molybdenum,
which is used to make steel alloys.

Alaska Balks at Unprecedented EPA
Action Against Pebble Mine Project. EPA on May 18 issued a highly critical draft analysis of the Pebble mine
project in southwest Alaska. The mine is expected to produce 80.6 billion pounds of copper, 107.4 million ounces of
gold, and 5.6 billion pounds of molybdenum. Those materials are currently worth close to $1 trillion.
EPA's analysis asserted the project would cause the loss of 87 miles of streams and seven square miles of wetlands.

The Editor says...
Inasmuch as "wetland" generally means "swamp", such a loss doesn't seem like much of a problem. There are plenty of "wetlands" in
Alaska's 663,268 square miles.

EPA actions at mine could hurt $220 billion in
investments. The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) preemptive assessment of the Pebble Mine in Alaska could have a "chilling effect" on
$220 billion in investments, according to the Brattle Group, an economic and financial consulting firm. In May, the EPA released its watershed
assessment of large-scale mining by Pebble LP at Bristol Bay, which could be one of the largest copper and gold mines in the world, and expressed concerns
over impact the mine would have on local salmon habitats and surrounding wetlands.

The Editor says...
There are plenty of other swamps in Alaska, and plenty of other places for the fish to live.

EPA
official: 'Crucify' oil companies. Al Armendariz, a regional administrator for the Environmental Protection Agency,
explained in 2010 that he understands the EPA policy to be to "crucify" a few oil and gas companies to get the rest of the industry
to comply with the laws.

Republican
floats measure calling on official to resign over crucify remarks. The resolution marks the latest push by
Republicans in Congress to put pressure on EPA Administrator Armendariz to step down. Rep. Jeff Landry (R-La.) introduced
a House resolution Friday calling on an Environmental Protection Agency official to resign over 2010 comments comparing enforcement
of clean-air laws to crucifixion. The resolution marks the latest push by Republicans in Congress to put pressure on EPA
Region 6 Administrator Al Armendariz to step down amid the firestorm over his comments.

The Editor says...
On Saturday, April 28, Democrat consultant Julian Epstein, speaking on the Fox News Channel, tried to play down the importance of Mr. Armendariz's
comments by referring to him as "a low-level EPA official." That is a deceptive mischaracterization, if not an outright lie.
Mr. Armendariz is was the Regional Administrator for EPA Region Six, which covers five oil-rich
states.* See for yourself at 2:50
into this video
clip. The Regional Administrator for EPA Region Six, whoever it is now, is a high-level EPA official. To claim otherwise
is a pernicious canard.

EPA chief: 'Crucify' comments
from official are 'disappointing'. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson on Friday [4/27/2012]
said an agency official's 2010 comments comparing enforcement of clean-air laws to crucifixion are "disappointing." But
Jackson declined to say whether the official would be fired or face any disciplinary action, saying the agency "will continue
to review" the situation.

"Crucify Them": The Obama
Way. One of President Obama's radical eco-bureaucrats has apologized for confirming an indelible truth:
This White House treats politically incorrect private industries as public enemies who deserve regulatory death sentences.
Environmental Protection Agency administrator Al Armendariz, an avowed greenie on leave from Southern Methodist University,
gave a little-noticed speech in 2010 outlining his sadistic philosophy.

Obama
Administration's Repeated Abuses Are Extension of Extreme Liberalism. Every day, we get a new kick in the
gut from the Obama administration. Most recently, Environmental Protection Agency Region 6 Administrator
Al Armendariz was caught on video articulating his view of the agency's role in enforcing its regulations. [...] This
man should be fired — yesterday. White House press secretary Jay Carney risibly says Armendariz wasn't
articulating the attitude of the administration. Sadly, that's precisely what he was articulating.

EPA
'crucify' official received $540k in federal taxpayer-funded research grants. The EPA official who
bragged about his "crucify them" enforcement philosophy against oil and gas companies — a story The
Daily Caller was the first to report on Wednesday — has collected or shared in at least $540,522 in
taxpayer dollars from the federal government to fund environmental projects that stretched from 2004 to 2010.

EPA
Expands Its Mission To Crucifixion. Free nations that respect the rule of law tend not to make examples
of their citizens, much less crucify them. This rule of thumb, however, seems to have been lost on the EPA, an
official from which had an interesting analogy to share in a video that has just surfaced.

More
than half of congressmen in EPA Region 6 seek removal of 'crucify them' official. Twenty nine of the 42 representatives in
the states contained within EPA's Region 6 — as well as Iowa Republican Rep. Steve King and Arizona Republican Rep. Trent
Franks — are pushing for the removal of Al Armendariz from his post as EPA Region 6 Administrator for his "crucify them"
enforcement philosophy against U.S. oil and gas companies. Rep. Mike Conaway announced a letter Friday calling on EPA administrator
Lisa Jackson to relieve Armendariz from his position.

EPA and the White House Wash
Their Hands of the 'Crucifixion' Mess. Earlier this week, a two-year old YouTube video surfaced that floated some raw sewage in the Obama
Administration's energy punchbowl. In it, EPA Region 6 Administrator Al Almendariz, speaking to a group of Texas citizens, chuckles while
comparing his agency's environmental enforcement strategy vis-à-vis oil and gas operators to conquering Roman legionnaires' strategy of random
crucifixion. How quaint.

Why Do Liberals Feel
Compelled To Apologize For Telling The Truth? [Al] Armendariz, as if knowing how bad that sounded, then tried to hedge his words on the
spot saying that even though the EPA's policy, according to him, was to crucify random and innocent people, that the EPA would only do this against
those breaking the law. "You make examples out of people who are in this case not complying with the law ..." he said. Of course, whether
or not "the law" is scientifically or constitutionally sound or not is never broached. It is important to note however to "crucify" someone
means to treat them "cruelly" and hence beyond what is reasonable or lawful. Look, despite his attempted hedging, this is another example of
a liberal saying what liberals believe when their handlers let them off their leashes.

Crucifixion as policy. Crucifixion was a terrifying, barbaric
punishment for going against the will of the state. The use of this archaic, cruel format of punishment was to subjugate those witnessing the
horror as much as it was to punish the victim. The product of the punishment wasn't even the castigation of the accused. It warned the
populace: "yield to MY will or you're next."

EPA
official apologizes for call to 'crucify' oil companies, senator investigating. A top EPA official has apologized
for comparing his agency's enforcement strategy to Roman crucifixion — as Republican Sen. James Inhofe launched an
investigation and told Fox News the comments are part of a campaign of "threats" and "intimidation." Al Armendariz, the
EPA administrator in the Region 6 Dallas office, made the remarks at a local Texas government meeting in 2010. He
relayed to the audience what he described as a "crude" analogy he once told his staff about his "philosophy of enforcement."

Top EPA official resigns after 'crucify'
comment. A top EPA official has resigned after coming under scrutiny for 2010 remarks in which he compared the
agency's enforcement strategy to Roman crucifixion. Al Armendariz, the top environmental official in the oil-rich South
and Southwest region, resigned in a letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson on Sunday [4/29/2012], saying he did not want to
be a distraction for the agency. The resignation is effective Monday.

BP 'Shakedown' Congressman: No
Crucifixion Advocacy 'of Any Kind'. The congressman who apologized to BP in 2010 for the Obama administration's
vociferous criticism of the oil giant responded to the resignation of an EPA official by noting no one should advocate
crucifixion "of any kind." Al Armendariz, who was warned just days ago that he'd be hauled in front of the Energy and
Commerce Committee to testify about his controversial remarks, resigned today.

Inhofe
on 'crucify' EPA official's resignation: 'It is not just Armendariz'. The resignation of the Environmental
Protection Agency's Region 6 administrator does not change the institutional problem with the agency's enforcement
philosophy, Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Inhofe told The Daily Caller on Monday [4/30/2012]. The ranking member of
the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works said that while it was right for Al Armendariz to resign in the wake of
his comments positively comparing oil and gas regulation enforcement to Roman crucifixions, the EPA, under President Barack
Obama, still has a problem with how it treats America's energy producers.

Appointees
show what Obama is. It really is difficult to try and describe the insanity that is the Obama administration only because
there is so much of it. Let's begin with the now-former Southwest regional director of the Environmental Protection Agency.
His name is Al Armendariz and it really should be changed to Pontius Pilate because he believes in crucifixion as did the most infamous
governor of Judea.

'Crucifying' EPA Regulator was
Eager to Inflict Pain. "While he has a long history as an environmental activist, I hope Dr. Armendariz recognizes
that this position is too important to be used as a podium for environmental activism," said Brian Shaw, Gov. Rick Perry's chairman
of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the state's lead environmental agency. "I urge Dr. Armendariz to use sound
science in his decisions." The former Southern Methodist University professor often worked on behalf of green activists, including
Environmental Defense, WildEarth Guardians, Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action, and Dallas-based Downwinders at Risk, information that is
not disclosed on his EPA bio.

The EPA is
earning a reputation for abuse. Maybe Al Armendariz — until Monday, one of the Environmental Protection Agency's
top administrators — didn't mean his comments to sound quite how they did. But they didn't sound good.
In a 2010 speech, now circulating online, Mr. Armendariz compared his "philosophy of enforcement" to ancient Roman soldiers'
practice of crucifying random victims in recently conquered territory.

Saving the planet, one
crucifixion at a time. What do Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas, Oklahoma and New Mexico have in common? They make up the
Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Region 6. They also constitute the core of America's energy production, especially
oil. Thus, they needed to be taught a lesson. Who better for that than Alfredo J. Armendariz, the former EPA Region 6
administrator, who served as an expert witness for environmental groups before joining the EPA in November 2009? Mr. Armendariz is
no longer with the EPA. He resigned on April 30 for committing the sin of clarity. He was a little too honest in
conveying the Obama administration's way of doing business.

EPA's 'Crucifixion' of Energy Sector Exposed.
For those of us in industry who have watched the agency grow in power and arrogance over the decades, there wasn't anything
all that surprising about somebody suggesting that the EPA uses threats and intimidation against the regulated
community. We all know, from long and bitter experience, that's how the EPA works. What was remarkable is that it
was an EPA official admitting it. Al Armendariz, EPA Region 6 administrator, was caught on tape urging the troops
attending a 2010 meeting to be ruthless in their dogged pursuit of dirty rotten polluters (aka: anybody in the private sector).

Global warming crusaders
lose steam, tempers. [Scroll down] This is becoming a more and more common feature of environmentalist rhetoric. The
violent imagery has even seeped into the pronouncements of the eco-priests at the Environmental Protection Agency. Recently, a video surfaced
of EPA Region VI Administrator Al Armendariz admitting that his agency's philosophy is to "crucify" oil and gas companies: "It was
kind of like how the Romans used to, you know, conquer villages in the Mediterranean. They'd go in to a little Turkish town somewhere,
they'd find the first five guys they saw and they'd crucify them. Then, you know, that town was really easy to manage for the next few
years." How can anyone, Left or Right, not be chilled to the bone to hear a government official talk in such a manner about federal treatment
of private companies and individuals? Incredibly, this man was in charge of enforcing environmental regulations in five states before the
uproar over his repulsive comments forced him to resign.

The 'Crucify Them' Presidency. Al "Crucify Them" Armendariz
resigned from the Environmental Protection Agency this week, for the mistake of telling it like it is. All he leaves behind is an entire administration of
Al Armendarizes.

Crucified by Government. Instead of being allowed to
resign, that regional administrator for random persecutions and crucifixions should have been sent out into the oil patch and made to wear steel-toed
boots, Carhartt overalls, and a hardhat while he did a month as a roughneck on a drilling rig, just to get a feel for the industry. Now he is gone,
and nothing much will change, except the EPA might issue a directive to its administrators advising them that the crucifixion of oil drillers is strictly
against agency policy and anyone violating this rule should expect to be sternly disciplined.

Obama
Is a Big-Time Law Violator. [Scroll down] The contempt that Obama bureaucrats have for the law is vividly illustrated
by a statement made by EPA Region VI Administrator Al Armendariz that became public last week. He described his "philosophy"
of EPA enforcement: [Armendariz quote omitted for brevity.] That wasn't hyperbole. That exactly describes the Obama
bureaucrats' attitude about enforcing their policy goals and dictatorial actions. It is encouraging that we have patriotic
State Attorneys General in nine states who know the Constitution and are willing to litigate against unconstitutional Administration
actions.

5 Ways Obama Is A Dictator. The EPA
imposed water quality rules in Florida which would have led to "...billions of dollars in compliance costs, significant spikes in utility bills and the
loss of thousands of jobs." In February, the Florida Attorney General prevailed in a lawsuit against the EPA in which the presiding judge
found "...the EPA's rules were not based on sound science..." Moreover, the judge declared the EPA had even failed to prove its scheme would
prevent any harm to the environment.

Former EPA official avoids his own
crucifixion. Al Armendariz, EPA's region six administrator, was scheduled to testify before the House Energy and
Commerce subcommittee on energy and power. His lawyer cancelled the appearance late Tuesday afternoon [6/5/2012] and said
Armendariz was no longer willing to testify, prompting lawmakers to expand their initial inquiry to determine if the White House
pressured the ex-official to drop out of the hearing.

This article includes a partial list of Obama administration scandals.The Obama Outrages: Government as Black Swan. In a recent Wall Street
Journal column, Kimberly Strassel writes that Al Armendariz, the EPA procurator who was going to crucify oil and gas companies just to let them know
who's boss, is hardly the exception to the rule within the Obama administration but rather exactly the kind of federal enforcer the president wants.
In other words, Obama considers him a feature — not a bug — in his plan to totally transform America. But if she's correct,
that would mean that Obama-style government could no longer be considered a "black swan" machine. Why? Because these disruptions
are planned, not random.

EPA official who quit over 'crucify'
remarks hired by green group. A former Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) official who resigned earlier this year for comparing his
work to crucifixion has found new employment with a leading green group. The Sierra Club on Friday announced that Al Armendariz would be joining
the group's "Beyond Coal" campaign next month as a senior representative.

Ousted EPA
administrator vows to "stop the construction of any new coal plants in Texas". Al Armendariz's big mouth cost him his job as a regional
administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. Now that he's working for the Sierra Club, Armendariz appears even more opinionated about
the industry he once regulated. In his first comments since resigning from EPA in April, Armendariz unloaded on the coal industry, called President
Obama the most environmental president ever, and attacked the state of Texas for fighting the EPA in court.

What is the EPA hiding? Numerous media reports have focused upon the
revolving door between the EPA and various environmentalist groups with hundreds officials reportedly moving back and forth between environmental agencies
and those that lobby them. The latest is Alfredo Armendariz, who resigned after a two year old video emerged of him explaining to environmental
groups that the EPA's enforcement policies compared favorably with those of the Roman Empire where they would crucify someone in a newly conquered town
to create the necessary fear in the citizenry. Now Armendariz is working with the Sierra Club on their anti-coal campaign, in just one more example
of the cozy relationship between the advocacy groups and the government that they lobby. And it is these very relationships that are at the heart of
the sue and settle controversy enveloping the Obama Administration.

EPA
official who wanted to 'crucify' oil companies praised EPA nominee for help in 'shaming states'. Al Armendariz, the
Environmental Protection Agency official who said regulators should "crucify" a few oil and gas companies as a warning to the
industry, praised Gina McCarthy for proposing air rules that were "icing on the cake" for agency effort to "sham[e] the states" into
greener policies. Armendariz made the comments in a 2012 email to other colleagues released by Sen. David Vitter, D-La. who is
raising questions about McCarthy, Obama's nominee to run the EPA.